Strong Artificial 2 Club Openings

[32519]

This hand was dealt at IMPs. Dealer = North with N/S vulnerable.

North opened the bidding with a strong artificial 2♣.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s954h6dj765ckj743&n=sakt7hakj42dcaqt8]133|200[/hv]

 

How would you find the cold ♣ slam using every one the more popular methods for responding to a strong artificial 2♣ opening bid listed below? If you use something else, e.g. Kokish, then include it so that we can see how you would find the ♣ slam.

 

1. Albarran

2. Cheaper Minor as a Second Negative

3. Control Showing Responses

4. Natural Responses

5. Oswald Jacoby Step Responses

6. Two Diamonds as “Waiting”, Two Hearts as “Negative”

 

I am trying to convince myself which of these methods is better to use.

 

Thanking you all in advance.

[sfi]

How would you find the cold ♣ slam using every one the more popular methods for responding to a strong artificial 2♣ opening bid listed below?

 

You're joking, aren't you?

[Cyberyeti]

We play negative 2♦ + kokish so:

 

2♣-2♦

2♥-2♠

3♣-4♣(better than 5)

4N(exclusion ♦, 4♦ would be kickback)-5♦(1)

5N(anything else useful)-6♣(no)

 

I've wondered for a while if there should be a specialised control ask for situations where you can't have more than say an ace and a queen or 2 kings to detail exactly what honours are held with one bid. This hand doesn't need it, but I can see circumstances where it would be useful to know eg

 

Step 1 No A or K (not needed if you have a double neg)

Step 2 K (can relay for Qs)

Step 3 A (can relay for Qs)

Step 4 2K

Step 5 A + K (used for 2 Ks one of which is in trumps, or A + Q trump)

[Yu18772]

Natural:

2♣-2♦

2♥-3♣

4♣*-4♥

4NT-5♣

6♣

North can count on cross ruff, so may be 7?

 

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

[32519]

You're joking, aren't you?

 

No, I am not joking. This hand occurred during an online team game some time ago. Neither table appeared to have proper agreements regarding the continuation bidding to an artificial strong 2♣.

 

At our table the bidding went: 2♣-2♦ (waiting)-2♥-3♣.

The 3♣ bid was understood to be the “second negative” and 0-4 HCP (see cheaper minor as the second negative above). After 3♣, North decided to blast into 4♥ which went down when the trumps broke 5-2 and the opponents kept tapping declarer in ♦.

 

At the other table a complete disaster unfolded when the bidding went: 2♣-2♦ (waiting)-2♥-4♣.

The 4♣ bidder was trying to show a real ♣ suit (versus 3♣ as the second negative). Needless to say, opener interpreted 4♣ as a splinter in support of ♥ and decided to blast straight into 6♥ which was doubled. Even with our own poor continuation agreements, our side picked up a sizeable gain on the hand.

 

I posted the hand to find out what others do. Not everyone plays 2♦ as waiting.

[gwnn]

And why is 22 such a magic number anyhow?

[sfi]

I posted the hand to find out what others do. Not everyone plays 2♦ as waiting.

 

Which is not what you asked. You asked for someone to tell you how to bid the hand in 6(!) different structures - all because neither table knew what their agreements were. Any sensible set of agreements should get you to the club slam on these hands, which should give you an idea about where the problem was in your match.

[ggwhiz]

2♣ - 2♦

2♥ - 3♣

 

In my methods, 2♦ is a gf (2♥ is a bust) and after that 3♣ is natural.

 

After that, North might even decide to bid 5nt as a graded gsf, find 1 of the top 3 and bid the grand.

 

I can't relate to or imagine any methods that don't lead to at least 6♣. The problem appears to be 4 different methods played by each of the 4 players.

[glen]

... I am trying to convince myself which of these methods is better to use ...

Which of these methods is better to use for this particular hand, or you plan to pick a method based on how it does for one particular hand, or this is the first of hundreds of hands you will give us to bid, following the American 2C Idol approach to eliminating contestants?

[blackshoe]

In Romex (the same methods could be used in a straight 2/1 system):

 

2♣-2♦...0 or 1 control

2♥-2NT...natural, 5+ cards;what else? 3♣ would be second negative.

3♠-4♣...both natural

4♦-4♠...RCKB for clubs. Partner can't have the ♦A; one key card (which must be the ♣K

6♣...not sure how to get to 7.

 

I don't know Jacoby Step Responses or Albarran (unless one of them is steps in HCP, 0-3, 4-6, and so on).

 

With 2♥ "double negative":

 

2♣-2♦...GF

2♥-3♣...natural

4♦-4♥...splinter, club support; first or second round heart control (which must be shortage).

4♠-5♣...spade control; nothing further to say

6♣... I don't think North can bid 7 here; maybe I'm wrong.

[32519]

Which of these methods is better to use for this particular hand, or you plan to pick a method based on how it does for one particular hand, or this is the first of hundreds of hands you will give us to bid, following the American 2C Idol approach to eliminating contestants?

 

I have already acknowledged the fact that my partner and I were guilty of not having proper continuation agreements following a 2♣ opening bid. I am hoping to find out how other methods would have found the ♣ slam. I have played with many random pickup partners on BBO who had either, a) Albarran, b) Control Showing Responses, or c) Jacoby Step Responses on their CCs. So can you or anyone else provide an auction using these methods illustrating how the slam could have been found?

 

Thus far we have

1. Kokish from Cyberyeti

2. Natural from Yu18722

3. 2♦ as GF, 2♥ as negative from ggwhiz and blackshoe

4. Romex from blackshoe

[32519]

2♣ - 2♦

2♥ - 3♣

In my methods, 2♦ is a gf (2♥ is a bust) and after that 3♣ is natural.

After that, North might even decide to bid 5nt as a graded gsf, find 1 of the top 3 and bid the grand.

I can't relate to or imagine any methods that don't lead to at least 6♣.

The problem appears to be 4 different methods played by each of the 4 players.

 

With 2♥ "double negative":

2♣-2♦...GF

2♥-3♣...natural

4♦-4♥...splinter, club support; first or second round heart control (which must be shortage).

4♠-5♣...spade control; nothing further to say

6♣... I don't think North can bid 7 here; maybe I'm wrong.

 

Using 2♥ as negative after 2♣ is pretty much what partner and I are now playing. It works well here because South has 5 HCP. Removing the ♦J from the South hand and replacing it with a spot card, reduces the hand to 4 HCP. How would you bid the hand now? The ♦J wasn't needed anyway.

[blackshoe]

4. Romex from blackshoe

I did mention that is how Romex would bid it, but from your original list, it's control showing responses combined with cheaper minor second negative.

 

Using 2♥ as negative after 2♣ is pretty much what partner and I are now playing. It works well here because South has 5 HCP. Removing the ♦J from the South hand and replacing it with a spot card, reduces the hand to 4 HCP. How would you bid the hand now? The ♦J wasn't needed anyway.

Loss of the ♦J wouldn't change the bidding for me.

[glen]

With the benefit of 20-20, here's my 2♣ system in "action":

 

2♣ (strong, but can be 18-19 balanced) - 2♦ (denies a five card major in a weak hand); -

2♥ (Kokish/Birthright like, 22+ balanced or GF ♥s) - 2♠ (denies a five card major, and not 7+ with a minor); -

3♣ (GF, Stayman, balanced or ♥s with secondary ♠s) - 3♦ (no four card major); -

3♥ (5+♥s) - 3♠ (3♠s, not a clear 3NT bid); -

4♣ (natural, implies 4-5-1-3 or 4-5-0-4) - 5♣ (natural); -

6♣

[aguahombre]

Since this is not a hand we would consider opening 2C on for more than a millisecond, we would end in 1H or a club slam --depending on whether opener got a second chance to act.

 

Either result would have picked up IMPS. :rolleyes:

[blackshoe]

Not as many as bidding 6♣. B-)

[DrMunk]

And why is 22 such a magic number anyhow?

 

 

:)

[PrecisionL]

This hand was dealt at IMPs. Dealer = North with N/S vulnerable.

North opened the bidding with a strong artificial 2♣.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s954h6dj765ckj743&n=sakt7hakj42dcaqt8]133|200[/hv]

 

How would you find the cold ♣ slam using every one the more popular methods for responding to a strong artificial 2♣ opening bid listed below? If you use something else, e.g. Kokish, then include it so that we can see how you would find the ♣ slam.

 

1. Albarran

2. Cheaper Minor as a Second Negative

3. Control Showing Responses

4. Natural Responses

5. Oswald Jacoby Step Responses

6. Two Diamonds as “Waiting”, Two Hearts as “Negative”

 

I am trying to convince myself which of these methods is better to use.

 

Thanking you all in advance.

 

None!

 

Try this web page for better method(s): http://www.rpbridge.net/7g72.htm

[Statto]

The 3♣ bid was understood to be the "second negative" and 0-4 HCP (see cheaper minor as the second negative above). ...

Interesting, I have always played 2NT as a 2nd negative, and it seems both pairs would have been better off with that here B-)

 

But I agree with Agua, this is not a 2♣ opening for me, with 3 possible suits that may be the best strain in a hand that is hardly a rock-crusher.

[Zelandakh]

One option you probably have not looked at is 2♥ as a double negative; 2♠ through 3♦ as semi-positives (transfers from 2NT); and 2♦ as anything else (positive or balanced semi-positive. That is great on this hand (respond 2NT) but may not be so good on others.

 

If you really want a method that shines on such hands (without competition) then it is clear that a strong club or strong diamond system is better. Fow example, if treating this hand as a GF, you might have the auction start

 

1♣ = 15+ nat/bal or 18+ any

... - 1♦ = (almost) any non-GF

1♠ = 18+ 3-suited or any unbal GF

... - 2♦ = 3-5

2♥ = natural, GF

... - 3♣ = natural, decent suit

 

where it is clear that much more useful information has been exchanged than with most 2♣ methods. The flip side is that you have to deal with more interference and need to put (a lot) more work into the system.

[PrecisionL]

Food for the critics:

 

Marty Bergen (the wild pre-emptor) in Chapter 4 of Slam Bidding Made Easier (2008):

 

The Bergen Gold Standard for opening 2♣:

(a) If the hand is balanced (4333 or 4432) open 2

♣

only if you have 22 hcp. Opener intends to rebid 2NT

(b) If the hand is semi-balanced (5332) or unbalanced only open if the hand has 4 or fewer losers and the hand also has 4 or more quick tricks.

 

Note: If you have only 4-losers, then you have 9 winners. Does that sound familiar?

[aguahombre]

Food for the critics:

 

Marty Bergen (the wild pre-emptor) in Chapter 4 of Slam Bidding Made Easier (2008):

 

The Bergen Gold Standard for opening 2♣:

(a) If the hand is balanced (4333 or 4432) open 2

♣

only if you have 22 hcp. Opener intends to rebid 2NT

(b) If the hand is semi-balanced (5332) or unbalanced only open if the hand has 4 or fewer losers and the hand also has 4 or more quick tricks.

 

Note: If you have only 4-losers, then you have 9 winners. Does that sound familiar?

Don't confuse Losing Trick Count with being the inverse of winner count. Also don't assume that all competent players would agree with Bergen's "quick trick" rule, even though nearly all would agree with the 4-loser part.

[Statto]

LTC should not come into effect until you have found a fit. The opening hand has about 8 playing tricks, and doesn't know where any additional tricks may lie. The fact that it has only 3 losers is immaterial. Do you really count your 4th card in a suit as a winner?

[Zelandakh]

Do you really count your 4th card in a suit as a winner?

Culbertson's rules for Playing Tricks: If your trump suit is of length 4-7, the 4th card and each subsequent card should be counted as a winner; if your trump suit is 8 or more cards long then each card after the second should be counted as a winner. In a side suit, the 4th and 5th cards are each half a winner; the 6th card counts as a whole winner. No fit required. Some more modern PT counters are more aggressive and, for example, count a side 5 card suit as 2 length winners. Even though they are around 80 years old, I think Culbertson's rules in this are still pretty good for a simple metric. As for the LTC, my advice is not to use it even when you do have a fit!

[Lurpoa]

This hand was dealt at IMPs. Dealer = North with N/S vulnerable.

North opened the bidding with a strong artificial 2♣.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s954h6dj765ckj743&n=sakt7hakj42dcaqt8]133|200[/hv]

 

How would you find the cold ♣ slam using every one the more popular methods for responding to a strong artificial 2♣ opening bid listed below? If you use something else, e.g. Kokish, then include it so that we can see how you would find the ♣ slam.

 

1. Albarran

2. Cheaper Minor as a Second Negative

3. Control Showing Responses

4. Natural Responses

5. Oswald Jacoby Step Responses

6. Two Diamonds as "Waiting", Two Hearts as "Negative"

 

I am trying to convince myself which of these methods is better to use.

 

Thanking you all in advance.

 

 

♥ ♥ ♥

 

One advice,

don't choose on the basis of this one example....

 

Other criteria: simplicity, robustness vs interference, frequency.....

 

♥ ♥ ♥