How do you bid a slam here?

[Liversidge]

If you do change down to one strong opening then I would suggest 3 weak 2 openings for simplicity. Wait until both of you are completely happy with this base before considering any more exotic alternatives.

 

Having read these postings and done some homework trying to develop a set of continuations for Benji that I could present to my partner for discussion, I now realise that at our level it gets far too complicated. For example, at what point does responder start to show controls after a 2♣ opening or a 2♦ opening, and should we use the 2♦ response to 2♣ as a relay or a negative, and what effect does that have on continuations, and what impact does the long suit denomination have, at what point does responder show controls etc. etc.etc.. In the end I gave up.

 

I am now strongly minded to take our advice and go for 3 weak 2's (with the 2♦ response as a negative), which makes it easier to develop a relatively simple system of continuations that can be refined over time. My partner's other partner will be happy too!

 

One area I am still unsure about is how to agree the strength of hand required for an unbalanced 2♣ opening bid. There are many different versions around: such as " "game forcing" (does that include if partner goes beyond 3NT with a long minor?), "game in hand opposite a bust" (does this mean 11 playing tricks if your long suit is a minor?), or '10 playing tricks" or which makes no distinction between a major and minor, "9 playing tricks - within one trick of game". Partner and I can form our own view on how strong we need to be to open 2♣ but shouldn't we set a higher threshold for a minor than a major? I am wondering whether none of my references address this. Isn't a minor with 10 playing tricks just the same as a major with 9 playing tricks when contemplating whether to open at the 1 level or 2♣?

[helene_t]

One area I am still unsure about relates to the strength of hand required for an unbalanced 2♣ opening bid.

There are a few things to consider:

1: is there a real risk that a 1-level opening will be passed out? If you are short in a suit higher ranking than your opening suit, that is usually not the case unless you have an extremely high number of HCPs. But if your opening suit would be spades it is more likely.

2: if it gets passed out, is it likely that a 2♣ opening would have taken you to a makeable game contract?

3: can you show your strength and shape if you open at the 1-level (assuming it won't get passed out)?

4: can you show your shape if you open 2♣?

 

As for 3, two-suited hands are quit easy since a jump shift shows a very strong hand. But 1-suited hands can be an issue. In Acol,

1♠-1NT

3NT

shows a balanced 19-count so you don't have that bid available for a 6322 that is too strong for 3♠ rebid. It is therefore a common agreement that a one-suited hands with a major can open 2♣ if it is close to GF, i.e. you need one useful honour or a fit in order to make game.

 

As for 4, 3-suited hands and some 2-suited hands are awkward so it is recomended that those hands only open 2♣ with GF strength (however, 4441 hands and some 5431 hands are better treated as balanced if too strong for a 1-level opening.

 

So in short: 2♣ shows:

balanced 22+ or 23+ (depending on where your 2NT range stops).

almost-gf onesuited hands with a major

any gf

[Zelandakh]

The beginner continuations for a Reverse Benji 2♦ opening are simplicity itself - 2♥ weak, not forcing; 2♠ any game force. OK, most play a little more than that but this was part of the first system I played competitively and was good enough.

 

For the 2♣ opening, there are several alternatives. One way is to use the 2♦ response as a negative with everything else as a natural positive. Another is for 2♦ to be a relay but denying a worthless hand or a good hand with a strong side suit. This is combined with a 2♥ response showing the worthless hand ("bust") and often 2NT is then used as a heart positive. Another idea is for 2♦ to show a positive, 2♥ a bust and higher calls to show a hand in-between, so-called semi-positives, with a variation being to combine the 2♦ relay idea with these semi-positives so that a balanced semi-positive responds 2♦. I think I would suggest the second of these schemes if you can handle the extra artificiality of the 2♥ response, the first otherwise.

 

If you use the first approach, the easiest way of playing the 2♣ opening is 22/23+ balanced or any unbalanced game force. Of course selling a hand as a game force does not necessarily mean game in hand, using similar criteria to your existing 2♦ opening is probably just fine - 9 tricks in a major is usually enough in a strong (not preemptive) hand. In a minor many do indeed like a little more - you have to weigh up the risk of a pass out against the risk of being too high. A corrollary is that the responses to a 1m opening tend to become slightly lighter.

 

If playing the second scheme then an additional possibility opens itself of including an Acol 2 in hearts. The 2♥ bust response now becomes non-forcing. It is actually possible to include an Acol 2 in spades here too but that is more complicated so probably better ignored for the time being. In the end, the 2♣ opening is not so very different from your Benji 2♦ except that the NT ranges change slightly and auctions for a GF hand with hearts become much simpler.