The Ultimate 2d Discussion

[eagles123]

Never mind the bollocks - the best use for 2d opening is...

[Cyberyeti]

Dependent on where the gap is in the rest of your system, if there is no gap, weak and destructive.

[gwnn]

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/64620-opening-2-diamonds/

 

you're treading on 32519 territory here:

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/55872-i-use-the-two-diamond-bid-for/

[Cyberyeti]

 

you're treading on 32519 territory here:

 

Is that possible without a spaceship ?

[gwnn]

I like 2D=diamonds constructive/hearts crap the most (only when NV) but you can't play that in most jurisdictions (which is bollocks). I enjoy mini-multi as well, as well as proper multi which includes strong hands with diamonds too. I was trying to learn Mexican 2D which I suspect is very useful but never managed to learn a structure with it, I'm a bit daft I guess. I really enjoyed 2D=10-15 with 6+ diamonds in a strong club context but now we're getting to specifics. Obviously a lot of stuff depends on your system etc but this is the bollocks part that you advised against.

[kuhchung]

Is that possible without a spaceship ?

 

My 2D bid can only gain and will never cost.

[mgoetze]

Wilkosz.

[Phil]

Flannery unless I have a gaping hole somewhere.

[Charlie Yu]

Wilkosz hands down.

[Zelandakh]

...probably not allowed under the local regulations. :angry:

[sfi]

Agree with Wilkosz. There was even data many years ago that where someone showed it gained an average of 3 IMPs a hand at world championship level, which is similar to my unscientific observations.

[PhantomSac]

Is Wilkosz weak with both majors? That would def be my first choice. 2nd choice weak with diamonds(!!)

 

edit: OK after googling looks like it's not weak with both majors.

[Cyberyeti]

Is Wilkosz weak with both majors? That would def be my first choice. 2nd choice weak with diamonds(!!)

 

edit: OK after googling looks like it's not weak with both majors.

 

Wilkosz is too difficult for most club players to even think about how to defend it, hence it's banned in a lot of jurisdictions.

[hrothgar]

Couple commetns about Wilkosz

 

1. The Wilkosz 2♦ opening shows a two suoted hand with at least 5-5 distribution.

At least one of the suits is a major.

It traditionally would show between 7-11 HCPs

 

2. As folks have noted, Wilkosz used to score incredibly well in high level competition (averaging +3 IMPs of some such)

There has been some claim that this is because the Wilkosz 2♦ was too difficult to defend against.

This is hogwash.

 

if you look at the actual boards, the great results were due to the fact that the players at the other table did not have a way to safley open the 5-5 hands but couldn't bear to pass.

 

They'd be playing some system based on very sound opening bids, open some 5-5 9 count, and get a horrible result when their partner would make a penalty double or they'd end up in a no play 3N contract on 20 HCPs.

 

My gut says that if Wilkosz were allowed today, it wouldn't score nearly as well because people's bidding systems have adjusted to better handle weak distributional hands.

[mgoetze]

Is Wilkosz weak with both majors? That would def be my first choice.

No, that's Ekrens. I personally believe that 2♥ is a much more effective bid for that, so I've played

 

2♠ 5+ Spades, 5+ minor (can be 4+ minor NV)

2♥ 4+ Spades, 4+ Hearts

2♦ Multi

 

2♠/♥ as nat weak 2 and 2♦ Ekrens is probably more effective if the opps haven't had a chance to discuss defense, though.

[wank]

I hate multi. I normally play 2d weak.

 

I'm quite attracted to flannery because i never saw anyone playing it in europe and i like being different. I realise it's much more common in america. I like the idea of bidding 2d 4M all the time too and leaving opps to defend blind.

 

Unfortunately i don't know enough of the nuances to have tried it. Should one open open 2d with 46? How well does it interact with KI and so on?

[PhantomSac]

No, that's Ekrens. I personally believe that 2♥ is a much more effective bid for that, so I've played

 

2♠ 5+ Spades, 5+ minor (can be 4+ minor NV)

2♥ 4+ Spades, 4+ Hearts

2♦ Multi

 

2♠/♥ as nat weak 2 and 2♦ Ekrens is probably more effective if the opps haven't had a chance to discuss defense, though.

 

Yeah for sure 2H weak with the majors is better than 2D, but I wouldn't want to have to play multi. Seems like having a bid for the majors is the nuts in general though.

[PhantomSac]

I hate multi. I normally play 2d weak.

 

I'm quite attracted to flannery because i never saw anyone playing it in europe and i like being different. I realise it's much more common in america. I like the idea of bidding 2d 4M all the time too and leaving opps to defend blind.

 

Unfortunately i don't know enough of the nuances to have tried it. Should one open open 2d with 46? How well does it interact with KI and so on?

 

It is quite uncommon here also fwiw, it is disproportionately played by some top players relative to our general population (Hamman, Bramley, Weinstein etc).

 

Yes you should open it with 4-6 almost always (exception would be really good hearts where you don't mind missing a 4-4 spade fit). KI is even less common here, mickyb made some posts about KI+flannery being the nuts, but I think that KI solves a main issue that flannery solves, it seems to me like playing KI + weak 2D or w/e is a lot better than playing KI+flannery or flannery + no KI.

[mgoetze]

Yeah for sure 2H weak with the majors is better than 2D, but I wouldn't want to have to play multi. Seems like having a bid for the majors is the nuts in general though.

Yeah another alternative is

 

2♠ nat weak 2

2♥ both majors

2♦ e.g. weak 2 in hearts or GF with diamonds

 

Works well with systems that have trouble describing GF hands with diamonds. That would be... most systems actually. ;)

[Cyberyeti]

Yeah another alternative is

 

2♠ nat weak 2

2♥ both majors

2♦ e.g. weak 2 in hearts or GF with diamonds

 

Works well with systems that have trouble describing GF hands with diamonds. That would be... most systems actually. ;)

 

You can easily stick another strong option into 2♦ as well, either a balanced range or strong 4441 or GF clubs for example.

[Phil]

 

Yes you should open it with 4-6 almost always (exception would be really good hearts where you don't mind missing a 4-4 spade fit). KI is even less common here, mickyb made some posts about KI+flannery being the nuts, but I think that KI solves a main issue that flannery solves, it seems to me like playing KI + weak 2D or w/e is a lot better than playing KI+flannery or flannery + no KI.

 

1. We do it with 4-6 and even 5-6.

 

2. Recent convert to KI. There's a lot of little wins since you get the best of a forcing and NF NT.

[fromageGB]

You can easily stick another strong option into 2♦ as well, either a balanced range or strong 4441 or GF clubs for example.

I'm playing 2♦ as either weak both majors (Ekrens style) or 21+ 3-suiter, and it fits together and works well. Obviously when playing a strong option you do not want to be passed out in 2♦, which rules out some of the other weak options!

[Cyberyeti]

I'm playing 2♦ as either weak both majors (Ekrens style) or 21+ 3-suiter, and it fits together and works well. Obviously when playing a strong option you do not want to be passed out in 2♦, which rules out some of the other weak options!

 

Yeah, I was thinking multi style, but you could make the weak 2 hearts only then play 2♥ Ekren which I think is better for the Ekren, worse for the hearts.

[Zelandakh]

Around here 2♦ as weak with hearts or strong is called Bamberger Multi and played fairly widely. The 2♦ mini-multi + 2♥ majors + 2♠ Muiderberg option is one that Chris Ryall helped to popularise in the earlier days of his website.

[wank]

it seems to me like playing KI + weak 2D or w/e is a lot better than playing KI+flannery or flannery + no KI.

 

interestingly, despite people saying the main benefit of flannery is the effect on your 1H opening sequences, i saw a stat, a pavlicek thing i think, saying that the flannery 2D opener was averaging +2 imps in itself, the same as a weak 2D. i'm guessing a weak 2D is more frequent though, albeit not hugely, assuming one plays a more disciplined style.

 

edit: found the study. i remembered the stats wrong. it's +1 imp per board, but that's slightly better than a weak 2D. weak 2D does significantly better at MP though fwiw. also fwiw in his sample events a weak 2 made 616 appearances versus 328 for flannery (this is pretty meaningless without knowing how many pairs play each convention but i suspect more play a weak 2D so they're roughly equally common).

 

flannery v not link: http://www.rpbridge.net/9x25.htm

weak 2D v not link: http://www.rpbridge.net/9x27.htm