New colour after a w2 opening bid

[42]

Hi,

 

I used to play that a new suit after a w2 opening is forcing. Actually we have a discussion whether this is good or bad, and with which hands one bids it.

 

How do YOU play it?

 

TIA!

Caren

[Cyberyeti]

Hi,

 

I used to play that a new colour after a w2 opening is forcing. Actually we have a discussion whether this is good or bad, and with which hands one bids it.

 

How do YOU play it?

 

TIA!

Caren

I play them non forcing but constructive, which IMO is the way to play them if your weak 2s are very wide ranging as ours are. If you play 6-10 6 card suit, you are probably better off playing them forcing.

[Flameous]

2M bids NF but constructive. Could be weaker with support for partners suit.

To force must bid on the 3 lvl.

 

Standard is that all new suits are forcing.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Playing it Forcing gives you an extra try at the best game contract when Responder has a good hand.

Example:

2D - 2S ( forcing, RONF )

??

...2NT! = x x x tripleton♠ or A x, K x, Q x honor-doubleton♠

...3S = honor-tripleton♠

...3C = none of above , but ♣ "feature" ( A or K; if agreed, may also be Q )

...3H = " " " " ♥ feature

...3D = none of above

...3NT = " " " but A K Q x x x of ♦

 

Note: the 3C and 3H replies are the same as if 2NT! ( feature-ask) were used

by Responder, but has at most x x in Responder's Major.

[the hog]

I play them as forcing. This makes far more sense to me rather than guessing whether opener has a good or bad weak 2.

[aguahombre]

RONF is the norm. Our style is that the bid may or may not be natural, but opener's obligation is to show her length in the new suit. Rebid of orig suit=stiff or void; cheapest NT=doubleton. 3rd suit=feature with 3-cards in 2nd suit; raise= 3 card support, etc.

 

This works better when our weak 2 bids are disciplined. If the new suit was not natural, responder was looking for shortness there.

[peachy]

I like it natural and forcing, particularly if the weak 2's are fairly disciplined.

[Free]

I don't see much merit in playing the NF (weak, constructive, whatever). Playing them as 1 round force helps us to find a better contract, find a game and even find slams. I've had some great hands where a natural bidding was much easier than having to jump or bid 2NT, while I can't remember a situation where I would've liked to bid 2X NF.

[Finch]

99% of the time partner opens a weak two in a major you pass, raise or bid 3NT. So it doesn't actually matter that much what you play.

 

In one partnership I play 2-level non-forcing but constructive, 3-level forcing

In the other partnership I play 2-level forcing, and transfers from 2NT upwards (but we don't play a weak 2D)

 

The 2-major response to a weak 2D comes up reasonably often, and the non-forcing meaning is useful.

[Cascade]

We play very wide ranging weak twos especially not vulnerable.

 

We often have to rescue ourselves from our weak twos so that works well.

 

Marty Bergen wrote about non forcing new suits in Better Bidding with Bergen Volume One pg 112.

 

We use new suits as nonforcing corrections, which I feel so strongly about that I would play them even if our weak-two bids were disciplined.

[the_clown]

I like to play transfers here.

2♠-?

 

2NT ♣s

3♣ -♦s

3♦- ♥s

3♥s- ♠raise, invitational or better.

 

Not sure if its popular, but it works pretty well, we are able to improve the paarscore, as well as well as to bid constructively. And no we dont miss Ogust.