another rant about wk 2bids

[mike777]

If your weak 2bid shows 5 in the bid major and an unknown minor...ok but tell us unknown minor not both majors

If your weak 2bid is 6-10 ...ok

 

 

if your weak 2bid is other ok...but please tell us.....

for example if zero or close to zero ....ok tell us.....

 

this time I just dismissed all your expl.

[barmar]

Huh? Context please.

[kenberg]

I certainly agree that if 2♥ shows hearts and a minor, we should be told. Beyond that, I am fine with silence although I suppose if 2♥ is regularly on five cards headed by the nine maybe something should be said. Here is a hand from yesterday, I am sitting South.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sthkj94dkt98c8653&e=sk6hat6d7432cat74&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=pp1npp2sppp]266|200[/hv]

 

The opening lead is the heart 8.

 

Even before dummy hits, I am wondering what's up. Lho passed but now came in with 2♠. Do the opponents owe me an explanation of why she did not open 2♠? In my opinion they do not. As far as my own side is concerned, I have played with N before and regard him as a good partner, but I have no idea if he would open 1NT holding a five card spade suit. I decided, correctly as it turned out, to play W for a weak six card suit. I figured if that was wrong and she had come in on five, this should be a very good board for us no matter what I assumed. She had six, it was a good board for us anyway.

 

For most of us, details about just how strong our suit is often presumes more agreements than we have. I play with a guy on Thursdays who opens a weak 2 vulnerable, even vulnerable against not, on suits that would give me pause when not vulnerable. But even I don't have hard and fast two of the top three or three of the top five rules. I take lots of things into account, but if I open 2♥ red versus white, partner can proceed on the assumption that my hand won't be an embarrassment.

 

If opponents inquire, and if I have played with a partner long enough to be able to make a reasonable estimate of what to expect, then yes, I tell them. With one partner who has now moved to Florida, if he opened 1NT and the opponents asked if he ever shaded the 15-17, I could say that I had never seen him do it. I resist putting him in a box by saying that he would never do it. With another partner he now writes the card as 14+-17. I appreciate this because in fact he often shaded the 15. I still (usually) hold out for 15. I'm a Capricorn and I have been told that Capricorns have their bids.

 

As barmar says, context counts here. The other day, sitting third seat, after P-1♣ I bid 3♠ holding seven to the AKQ and the King of clubs. I doubted 4♠ would have a play, which it didn't, and 3♠ may cause them grief, which it did. My 3♠ doesn't show that hand, I just had that hand.

 

Anyway, specific agreements such as 2M promising an outside minor should certainly be alerted. I have found that it usually is, although there have been times when after the cards have been played I am tempted to say something along the lines of "You call four to the king an outside minor?".

 

 

Indeed, context counts.

[barmar]

Actually, the context I was looking for was why this was brought up in the first place. The way it's written seems to suggest that misinformation about artificial weak 2 bids is common.

[lalldonn]

Barmar welcome to the forums!

[pigpenz]

I used to play weak twos

that showed only five card suit and four card side suit

we alerted it

 

we played

2♦ showed diamonds/hearts or diamond/clubs

2♥ showed hearts/spades or hearts/clubs

2♠ showed spades with a minor

 

anchor suits were five cards in order to fulfill acbl regs for a weak two bid

we alerted cause they were not your typical weak two bids

 

 

Barry Crane used to frequently open 4 card suits as a weak two, little alone

whatever Bergen and Cohen did later on, ACBL made up the 5-5 rule to try and

reel this type of stuff in.