Multi: weak or strong.

[kgr]

temas; IMPs

[hv=pc=n&s=sqt642hkj642dq6c2&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=2d(multi)p]133|200[/hv]

Partner opened 2♦, multi; including following possibilities:

- 6cMajor, weak

- 6cMajor, semi-forcing

- GF with a minor

- 22-23, NT

- 24+, NT

 

It was clear for me what to bid here.

The 5c-Majors tend to indicate that partner has a strong hand for a change. Therefore it is maybe best to bid 2♥ and give partner room to describe his hand.

But you never know that partner has a weak 6cMajor? Then we should maybe play in 4M?

- 2♥; 2♠; 3♥; 3♠ : Pass or correct

- 4♣: asks partner to bid his major in transfer

- 4♦: asks partner to bid his major

- 2NT: asking relay (with a strong hand partner will bid 3NT or higher).

[mgoetze]

Hey, you wanted to play this system, you got the problem you asked for.

 

I would at least want to know what system opps are playing against multi before considering further, e.g. do they pass with a takeout of hearts?

 

Then again, I am not an expert, presumably experts don't need this information since you posted without it in the expert-class bridge forum.

[kgr]

I would at least want to know what system opps are playing against multi before considering further, e.g. do they pass with a takeout of hearts?

Natural and TO-dbls.

With short ♥, opening values and a 4c♠:

- East will first pass and DBL 2♥

- West will DBL 2♥

[helene_t]

I think there is a reasonable chance that p has a strong hand. So I just bid 2♥.

 

Maybe 2NT could work, though, if it won't confuse partner but might confuse opps.

[MrAce]

Kgr, your multi options #3 is in deep conflict with your response structure #2 and 3. And with half of #1 imho.

 

Anyway, I would bid 2♥ with this hand and with given methods. I am not worried at all about it being passed out.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

2NT.

 

May disuade them from entering, and will make sure, we endup

in the right strain.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Free]

Obvious 2♥ imo, we expect partner to be strong so we want to give him as much space as possible to describe his hand. And in case he has a weak version in ♥ I expect opps will probably help us.

 

2♥ is better than 2♠ because opener can have a strong version with ♥ and your response structure might have issues to show that hand type properly.

[NickRW]

2♥. IMO your opening is overloaded.

[kgr]

I have updated the diagram with a couple more bids:

teams; IMPs

[hv=pc=n&s=sqt642hkj642dq6c2&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=2d(multi)p2Np3Np4dp4hp4sp5h]133|200[/hv]

Partner opened 2♦, multi; including following possibilities:

- 6cMajor, weak

- 6cMajor, semi-forcing

- GF with a minor

- 22-23, NT

- 24+, NT

 

It was clear for me what to bid here.

The 5c-Majors tend to indicate that partner has a strong hand for a change. Therefore it is maybe best to bid 2♥ and give partner room to describe his hand.

But you never know that partner has a weak 6cMajor? Then we should maybe play in 4M?

- 2♥; 2♠; 3♥; 3♠ : Pass or correct

- 4♣: asks partner to bid his major in transfer

- 4♦: asks partner to bid his major

- 2NT: asking relay (with a strong hand partner will bid 3NT or higher).

I have updated our bidding in the diagram above.

I started with 2NT. And then transferred to ♥ (I don't know why i didn't transfer to ♠ first).

The bidding would have been easier when I would have started with 2♥ iso 2NT.

=> In the diagram above: Pass 5♥ or bid 6?

[mgoetze]

(I don't know why i didn't transfer to ♠ first).

Typical expert-class problem...

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

Pass is out, 6H.

 

I dont think that the bidding after 2H would have been a lot easier,

... except you find out if partner is 22-23 or 24+, having those two

options in the 2D bid together is completly insane (sry).

 

Over 3NT, you need to know, how to show the 55, and due to space

considerations using the route you have choosen, instead xfer to

spade, followed by xfer to hearts is certainly ok, the 54 hands

have to go via 4C.

You will face issues, if your NT opening may contain 5 card majors,

those hands should be sold as semiforcing in the major.

 

The auction, having started with 2NT, should also set up a forcing

seq. up to 4NT, if you have a major suit fit, the 5 level has to be

safe.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Free]

=> In the diagram above: Pass 5♥ or bid 6?

Flip a coin

[kgr]

Hi,

 

Pass is out, 6H.

 

I dont think that the bidding after 2H would have been a lot easier,

... except you find out if partner is 22-23 or 24+, having those two

options in the 2D bid together is completly insane (sry).

 

Over 3NT, you need to know, how to show the 55, and due to space

considerations using the route you have choosen, instead xfer to

spade, followed by xfer to hearts is certainly ok, the 54 hands

have to go via 4C.

You will face issues, if your NT opening may contain 5 card majors,

those hands should be sold as semiforcing in the major.

 

The auction, having started with 2NT, should also set up a forcing

seq. up to 4NT, if you have a major suit fit, the 5 level has to be

safe.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

I did bid 6♥ and we were missing ♦A and ♠A for -1.

That was the main disadvantage of starting with 2NT iso 2♥, it didn't leave me romm to check for aces.

[Hanoi5]

Flip a coin

 

You cannot do that legally.

[mikeh]

reading the system description made my head explode.

 

and that is from someone who has played some multi.

[Cyberyeti]

Would have started with 2♠, works best opposite anything except weak 2 in spades.

 

Eg - 2♦-2♠-2N-3♥(♠) and I've got my 5-5 off my chest.

[helene_t]

reading the system description made my head explode.

 

and that is from someone who has played some multi.

Yes, probably better only to have a single or maybe two strong variants in the multi. Six hand types is a bit much. Actually it should probably count as twelve types if GF hands with 6m4other are allowed.

[Free]

reading the system description made my head explode.

 

and that is from someone who has played some multi.

Believe it or not, but there are an enormous amount of pairs playing something very similar in our country (usually 2♣ semi-GF/NT 22-23/something weak ; 2♦ GF/NT 24+/weak 2M). Whenever they have a strong hand they get into trouble by a lack of bidding space, even if they don't mess up the initial response.

[mikestar13]

I know that in some bridge jurisdictions Multi is restricted (my own ACBL is the worst example Multi is disallowed entirely on the GCC). I believe at the lower levels in England it is required to include a reasonably frequent strong option and there may be similar restriction elsewhere.

 

But assuming there is no regulatory requirement, what is the rationale for having strong options? The mini-Multi (always weak) is an equally effective preempt, with no strong hands that suffer from self-preemption.

 

Maybe if the strong hand possibilities plug a major system hole it could be wortwhile, but even then it is quite dangerous to lump several different strong possibilities into the bid. I can imagine a multi where if strong, opener has a balanced 25 or about. I can also imagine a multi where if strong, it is GF with primary diamonds. I find it hard to wrap my mind around how to unwind things if it could be either of those, or 22-ish balanced, or GF with primary clubs, or just short of GF with a primary major.

[helene_t]

But assuming there is no regulatory requirement, what is the rationale for having strong options? The mini-Multi (always weak) is an equally effective preempt, with no strong hands that suffer from self-preemption.

You can include a few strong options that are awkward to bid via a 2♣ opening while specific enough to be able to survive partner's 3♥ preemptive raise. For example, you can put 23-24 balanced hands in the multi, then 2♣....2NT is 21-22 , and GF via Kokish, and the 2NT opening is free for something fun like weak with both minors. Or maybe you want to play 2NT as 19-20, or you don't want to play kokish for some reason.

 

Another option is to include strong hands with diamonds in the multi. The at least you don't have to worry that p will have long diamonds and pass your 2♦ opening :) This frees up the 2♣....3♦ sequence which can be used for single-suited hands with clubs, so that 2♣.....3♣ promises a second suit next to the clubs. I know that many play 2♣....3M as showing long diamonds plus a four-card major, but you might want to use that for different purposes, for example an old-fashioned monster 1-suiter demanding a cue, or a 4441 GF hands.

[Cyberyeti]

But assuming there is no regulatory requirement, what is the rationale for having strong options? The mini-Multi (always weak) is an equally effective preempt, with no strong hands that suffer from self-preemption.

 

Maybe if the strong hand possibilities plug a major system hole it could be wortwhile, but even then it is quite dangerous to lump several different strong possibilities into the bid. I can imagine a multi where if strong, opener has a balanced 25 or about. I can also imagine a multi where if strong, it is GF with primary diamonds. I find it hard to wrap my mind around how to unwind things if it could be either of those, or 22-ish balanced, or GF with primary clubs, or just short of GF with a primary major.

 

I used to play weak 2M, strong balanced, 20+ 4441 any, it allows you to play strict 2 point ranges in your notrump rebids and rebid 2N showing a precise 2 point range up to 27 (and 3N up to 33) if you use kokish over 2♣ as well. The strong 2 in a minor we found ineffective, but the strong 4441 removed hands that were a problem in our system even if they are rare.

[mycroft]

Yeah, to me (who has mostly theoretical experience with the Multi, and almost none whatever with Multi-with-strong-variants), it's the Acol 2s in the Major that is the mind-bender. It effectively stops you from playing Paradox responses, since you can't have 2♦-2♠; 3♥ mean both "you were concerned I might have spades; I have hearts" and "I have an Acol 2 in Hearts" (and the coding required to unravel the rest of the strong variants artificially while still making room for "next major is C in P/C" seems - difficult, and difficult to remember).

[kgr]

2♣ opening is weak for us (mini-precision).

We like that 2♣ opening, and that is the cause of 2♦ multi having all these variant.

Maybe it would be better if we have 2♣ strong instead of mini-precision.

[helene_t]

Or play polish club if you really like the 2c opening

[helene_t]

Or you can pretend that strong hands don't exist. Just open at the onelevel with 10 playing tricks and at the five or six level (or 4nt specific ace ask) with 11. Unsound of course but at matchpoints the gain from having the entire two level for preempts might well be worth it.