How Effective Is A Weak Two Diamonds Bid?

[nullve]

1) Line 2: What is "GF, 5+ S, unBAL"? is it another option for the 2♦ opener? I'm asking because it contradicts the "< Rule of 19" condition.

 

2) Line 4: A Pass after which sequence and 2+ cards in which hand?

 

3) Line 5 "22" and line 9 "4S4H4+D": Does that mean you might play 2♥ in a 4-2 fit?

1) Yes, another option I show with 2N+ over 2♦-2♥/♠.

2) It's the Pass opening in 1st seat NV. :) (Mentioned in post #3 )

3) Yes. :( But unlike when responding to Ekren's 2♦, Responder will never choose the wrong major with 2S2H opposite 5M4OM.

[Jinksy]

You don't want to know :)

 

Jxxx, xxx, xx, Jxxx has been known to be opened 2♠ for example. This was the first one we picked up after agreeing to play this style, and indeed generated a 4 figure number, LHO overcalled 3♦ and partner with his 2N opener with ♦AQ108 knew what to do with that.

 

So you play straight penalty doubles after these openings? We've been dithering about whether to play pens or takeout, since opener will often have a 4-card side suit.

[Vampyr]

So you play straight penalty doubles after these openings? We've been dithering about whether to play pens or takeout, since opener will often have a 4-card side suit.

 

Really? In a natural weak two?

[Cyberyeti]

Really? In a natural weak two?

 

Clearly opposite a normal tightly defined weak 2, X is pens, but as your weak 2s get shorter and more wide ranging, there becomes more of a case for a ToX, we do however play straight penalties.

[Jinksy]

There's a great anecdote in Alan Mould's book on preempts where third in (and I assume favourable), Brian Senior opens 2♦ on xxxx xxx Jxx xxx.

 

After the hand in response to Mould's quizzical look, he explains that 'I wanted to show where my values were'. Mould remarks that the plural was rather generous.

[JLilly]

According to the stats it generates on average over 2 imps per boards or 58% when it's employed.

 

To compare using a bid to express A versus using it to express B, you need to look at the very least at the set of hands suitable for A OR for B, because using a bid as A rather than as B has an opportunity cost in the gains you forgo by not using the bid as B. So we also have to ask, how does playing weak 2♦ fare when it's *not* employed, and some other use for 2♦ is? My understanding is that experienced players agree that the standard weak 2♦ hand is considerably more frequent than a Flannery hand, but on any given board, the swing from a Flannery hand using Flannery is greater than that from a weak 2♦ hand using weak 2♦.

 

And that's not to mention negative inference: using 2♦ as Flannery gives partner (and opps) information about your 1♥ openers even if a Flannery hand never comes up; similiarly using it as a standard weak 2 gives partner and opps information about your 1♦ and 3♦ openers.

 

And even if everyone agreed on the relevant set of hands to run the numbers on, there's also what kind of environment you're playing in -- how likely opps are to deal well with your bid, how likely they are to not open when you're in second seat (if you have a weak 2♦ hand and not a Flannery hand, that's ~5 more HCP that opps could have and a swing in their suit holdings in favor of the majors), etc.

 

(This isn't meant to be an argument in support of one or another use of 2♦ -- I'm too new to the game to have much worth saying there -- just wanted to make a comment on the use of statistics and inference from observations.)

[Winstonm]

Whilst playing at home with a few friends this weekend, I have again noticed (in a session of about 30 boards) that the Weak Two in ♦ (6 card suit, about 6-10 points) is not as effective as a weak two in ♥ or ♠.

 

It is something I have thought about previously, as it easier to overcall 2♦ than a weak two in ♥s or ♠s.

 

It is interesting to note that whilst European players I find use the 2♦ bid to cover a multitude of hands, from Acol strong two bids, Benji, Flannery or Multi 2♦, American players playing 2/1 or SAYC tend to keep the 2♦ as weak.

 

Is it such an effective weapon in a bridge player's armoury given its low pre-emptive level? I tried comparing it to a weak NT bid (12-14) which, I feel, has more of a pre-emptive impact than a weak 2♦ even though they are different types of hands.

 

Your comments as always would be appreciated. Thank you.

 

Coming to this thread late but a couple of comments may be of use to you. While it is true that 2D does not stop many overcalls, think what it does take away - communication space. When the opps have to start their conversation at 2h/2s or 3c, we have removed their ability to reverse, jump shift, jump rebid, splinter, forcing NTs, etc. Basically, we put them back into the stone age of bidding and guessing how much each other holds. This is a positive accomplishment.

[mikl_plkcc]

I have got some good results opening a hand with traditional 2♦, where it would be passed if 2♦ is conventional because it is not long enough to open 3♦. Note that I stick to the traditional weak 2 at the 1st or 2nd seat, including shape and honour requirements, therefore the partner can treat it as a picture bid.