whereagles Posted February 5, 2012 Report Share Posted February 5, 2012 Cross-imp pairs, expert opps, expert but overbidder pard (lol). [hv=pc=n&n=sq8763hkq42d3cakq&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=2d(multi%20%5Bweak%20only%5D)]133|200[/hv] RHO is usually solid with his preempts. The 2♦ is multi, with no strong options, so it's non-forcing. In fact, you've seen LHO pass it on occasion. Your gadgets are: - Dbl = 12-14 balanced or any 18+, lebensohl by responder ON.- 2NT = 15-18 system on- 2H/S = take-out of S/H- 3x = natural- Pass + action = weaker than direct action Bid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wank Posted February 5, 2012 Report Share Posted February 5, 2012 yes i bid. the bid i choose is 2nt. 2nd choice: pass. 3rd choice: stupid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wank Posted February 5, 2012 Report Share Posted February 5, 2012 oops Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted February 5, 2012 Report Share Posted February 5, 2012 If u agree with your pd that opponents can not play it undoubled when they pass an artificial bid then you wont have to worry about 2♦ being passed out. Without this i would bid 2 NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted February 5, 2012 Report Share Posted February 5, 2012 I think your agreements are poor if you can't make a simple overcall in a major. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloa513 Posted February 6, 2012 Report Share Posted February 6, 2012 I think your agreements are poor if you can't make a simple overcall in a major.I think his agreements are poor because it doesn't make the simple assumption that opener's hand is a weak two in hearts then choose the bids as though that was true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted February 6, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2012 I think your agreements are poor if you can't make a simple overcall in a major. The agreements I shown are sort of standard around here, where most top pairs use the multi :) For the record I actually prefer other schemes, which do allow for natural overcalls (pard prefers the standard one). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted February 6, 2012 Report Share Posted February 6, 2012 There are many defences to the Multi out there. The one described is Dixon and is standard in the UK. 2♠, limited take-out of hearts, is essentially your 2-level overcall here. A 3 level overcall is also limited but promises a 6 card suit. You have 2 choices, 2NT or 2♠. On this hand the spades are poor enough to treat them as 4 so I think 2NT is best. With better spades I would start with 2♠ and rebid 3♠ should partner advance in diamonds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted February 6, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2012 Oh this actually has a name :) How's this other one called? 2♦ ?? Dbl = take out of spades2♥ = take out of hearts2♠ = natural Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted February 6, 2012 Report Share Posted February 6, 2012 The agreements I shown are sort of standard around here, where most top pairs use the multi :) For the record I actually prefer other schemes, which do allow for natural overcalls (pard prefers the standard one).No wonder most top pairs use the multi if this is the standard defence :) (trolling off: I used this defence too but X was either a 2M overcall or 18+ any). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted February 6, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2012 That one sound like "multi vs multi" :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted February 6, 2012 Report Share Posted February 6, 2012 Yes except there's two variants of that (well probably 20 is closer to the real number): I think in the original version 2M was a t/o of M not of oM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted February 6, 2012 Report Share Posted February 6, 2012 Oh this actually has a name :) How's this other one called? I just know this is as the "ACBL recommeded defence". Gwnn's "double = 1 major or a big hand" is, as you say, multi versus multi. All of these, plus a transfer defence, are listed at Chris Ryall's site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted February 6, 2012 Report Share Posted February 6, 2012 There are many defences to the Multi out there. The one described is Dixon and is standard in the UK.It was standard in the UK about 20 years ago. Nowadays almost everyone I know plays natural overcalls, but maybe it's a regional thing. A few years ago the Bridge World carried out a survey of methods against a Multi. Two different respondents presented methods that they said were "standard in the UK" (or they may have said England). They were, of course, completely different. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted February 6, 2012 Report Share Posted February 6, 2012 in Madrid we also play a lot the 2M short defence. I still play it with my father, I haven't missed the 2M overcall very often but I don' t think its best. On the given hand I would bid 2NT regardless of my methods. I disagree with MrAce about 2♦ being forcing for us, seems to me that agreement can be exploited by opponents with strong hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codo Posted February 6, 2012 Report Share Posted February 6, 2012 In Germany, against the multi many players play 2 M, 2 NT natural (with MAJOJS Stopped), X take out against spades or 18+ leaping Michaels. For the given hand, 2 NT seems easy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbenvic Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 Rarely come across a weak only multi (except 4+4+ Majors) 2♦ other than wk either Major. Does it have any other options? ie 3 suited weak 2 suited wk, minor pre-empt? If its just weak either major I use x=16+ unbal (or 21+bal) 2nt as 15-18 Bal and 2 major natural good suit overcall (12+ points but stress good suit) Also use leaping Michaels. 3c/d would be Nat almost always a 6 card suit (good quality) and circa 13-15 points So here it's an easy x, I don't like using 2nt here as pards can mistake my hand for Balanced, maybe he bids 6♦ and now what do you do? Pass (and do something next round if there is one) is my second option but I don't like it much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted February 8, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 Thanks all. This was the full hand: [hv=pc=n&s=sa2haj97da8652c32&w=skjt954h8djcjt765&n=sq8763hkq42d3cakq&e=sht653dkqt974c984&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=2d(multi%20%5Bweak%20only%5D)]399|300[/hv] I held the North cards. I decided against pass because I felt LHO might be loaded with diamonds and pass this. Afterwards he said he would indeed pass 2♦. I didn't dbl because I wasn't strong enough to pull pard's response to spades, especially with that moth-eaten suit. So that seemed to leave me with an off shape 2NT. Here's what followed: (2♦) ... 2NT 3♣ (puppet)3♠ 4NT..?? Pard intended this as quantitative, but it is actually RKCB for spades. Even if it were indeed quantitative, that would be WILDLY optimistic (I told you he overbids lol). As to what happened in the end, I'll spare you the details. Suffice to say chalk +1 to the multi. Or rather +55 cross-imps :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 WTF were you doing answering 3 spades with both majors? giving any blame to partner after that is ridicoulous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted February 8, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 You're right. I must make a note to incorporate a 5-4 majors response to puppet :P Seriously now, I should have made the following clarification: pard can puppet on a 3-card major. 3♣ does not promise a 4-card major. Since I had to guess what to respond, I judged pard to be a favorite to hold a 3-3 or 3-2 majors and hence the spade bid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 Pard intended this as quantitative, but it is actually RKCB for spades. Even if it were indeed quantitative, that would be WILDLY optimistic (I told you he overbids lol). I would think 4NT to be quantitative and 4♥ over 3♠ RKCB on ♠ because 4♥ can not be natural. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 Thanks all. This was the full hand: [hv=pc=n&s=sa2haj97da8652c32&w=skjt954h8djcjt765&n=sq8763hkq42d3cakq&e=sht653dkqt974c984&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=2d(multi%20%5Bweak%20only%5D)]399|300[/hv] I held the North cards. I decided against pass because I felt LHO might be loaded with diamonds and pass this. Afterwards he said he would indeed pass 2♦. I didn't dbl because I wasn't strong enough to pull pard's response to spades, especially with that moth-eaten suit. So that seemed to leave me with an off shape 2NT. Here's what followed: (2♦) ... 2NT 3♣ (puppet)3♠ 4NT..?? Pard intended this as quantitative, but it is actually RKCB for spades. Even if it were indeed quantitative, that would be WILDLY optimistic (I told you he overbids lol). As to what happened in the end, I'll spare you the details. Suffice to say chalk +1 to the multi. Or rather +55 cross-imps :) This is nothing to do with the multi, it's everything to do with you and your partner not knowing your methods after a 2NT overcall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 That one sound like "multi vs multi" :P I usually play 2M natural and dbl Dixon (weak NT or very strong), but against 2D 'bad multi' i.e. showing a bad weak 2 in a major (as played in particular by Norwegians) I also like dbl = overcall in one major, because it reduces the risk that you overcall in their suit, and is a good way to pick up a penalty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 If u agree with your pd that opponents can not play it undoubled when they pass an artificial bid then you wont have to worry about 2♦ being passed out. Without this i would bid 2 NT. That's a really bad agreement if the opponents know about it, it only works if they aren't aware of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted February 8, 2012 Report Share Posted February 8, 2012 That's a really bad agreement if the opponents know about it, it only works if they aren't aware of it. I think i already wrote this in another thread. I assume you are concerned that good opponents (even the bad ones) will simply pass each 2♦ opening knowing that you have to DBL and set you up. And i agree with this. If we alert and let opponents know this we are screwed as you said, if we dont alert we are cheating. So DBL in balancing seat should not be AUTO on a passed artificial suit as oppose to what i said previously. That one was a quick fix for those who plays more MP and not too often against same good opponents. In order to strip your side from this ethical trap you load the hands that passes in 2nd seat over 2♦ which can not be TOO strong. Thus balancing player does not have to AUTO balance. This simply makes it way too risky for opponents to AUTO pass all 2♦ openings with the intention to set you up, because balancer will occasionally pass. After all, it’s not unlikely that, when they choose to pass the artificial bid, they had no right decision to make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.