2 clubs opening bid

[maris oren]

What is the most acceptable response to partner's 2 C opening bid?

 

I learnt one way and my partner another

[apollo1201]

I guess it depends a lot on what 2C means. Precision? Strong but non GF? GF? Weak with D or strong-ish?

 

I passed a strong non-GF 2C with J 7th C and out...

[nullve]

What is the most acceptable response to partner's 2 C opening bid?

2♦

[Douglas43]

Assuming 2C is strong and artificial, there are several possible schemes of responses. This is what I was brought up with and would assume to be in use if I sat down opposite a partner for a casual game:

2D is negative 0-7 (and over 2C-2D-2H/S 2NT is a second negative, showing a terrible hand)

Any other suit bid is 8+ hcp and natural, should be a reasonable suit

2NT is a scruffy flattish 8-10

 

With my regular partner I play 2D as more of a relay and a very good quality suit is required for a positive (roughly AKJ1098)

 

Control showing responses also used to be fashionable

 

The Kokish convention by opener is also popular these days (2C-2D-2H is a relay)

 

But there isn't really a "right" answer, just agree something and go with it

[Cyberyeti]

What is the most acceptable response to partner's 2 C opening bid?

 

I learnt one way and my partner another

 

Where you are makes a difference too.

 

Some play a 2♥ response as an absolute bust with 2♦ guaranteeing something, for others 2♦ is the weakest bid.

 

It used to be a thing that you responded artificially with how many controls you have, but few if any do that now.

[fromageGB]

2♦ I will agree with nullve. That seems to be the most common. However, with a regular partner agree the whole approach and what continuations and rebids mean, as the initial response depends on that. I am in the group that prefers 2♦ to deny holding whatever values you ascribe to 2♥, or other bids if any.

[blackshoe]

7NT, but only if it works.

[JonnyQuest]

7NT, but only if it works.

 

Or better, PASS (but only when it works). ;)

[nige1]

What is the most acceptable response to partner's 2 C opening bid? I learnt one way and my partner another

After partner's strong 2♣ opener, John Matheson recommends control responses

 

• 2♦ = ART. A king or less.
• 2♥ = ART. 2 controls (A or KK).
• 2♠ = ART. 3 controls (AK).
• 2N = ART. 3 controls (KKK)
• 3♣ = 4 controls.

 

But without detailed discussion, you might try ..

• 2♦ = REL. Catch all.
• 2♥/2♠/3♣/3♦ = NAT good 6+ card suit
• 2N = BAL 9+ HCP with tenaces.

[morecharac]

What is the most acceptable response to partner's 2 C opening bid?

 

I learnt one way and my partner another

Who can adjust more easily to the other's way of playing it?

 

If you're playing Standard American (the plug-and-play of systems) or one of its offshoots:

 

For beginners, I'd recommend 2♦ waiting because that allows auctions similar to 1-level openers and has the friendliest learning curve. I'd add the double negative response as something beginners should use from the very start, even though I didn't learn it. After a 2♣ opener:

• 2♦ = waiting bid, not stopping below game (some play it only forcing one round)
  
• 2♥ = total bust hand (0-2 HCP or so), opener rebids whatever contract they want to play in
  
• 2♠ = natural ♠ bid, whatever partnership has agreed is required
  
• 2NT = natural ♥ bid, whatever partnership has agreed is required
  

Fairly intuitive and easy to remember.

 

With non-beginners, I've lost track of how many different response systems I've seen used by SA players. 2♦ waiting is most common, controls (aces and kings) and HCP showing up often enough that I'm not surprised.

[PrecisionL]

One of my partners likes:

 

2♦ = 0-5 hcp & 0-1 control

2♥ = 6+ hcp & 0-1 control

2♠ = 2 controls

2NT = 3 controls (3 Kings)

3♣ = 3 controls (A+K)

3♦ = 4 controls, etc.

 

Not enough hands yet to decide upon usefulness.

[TylerE]

My personal favorite set of responses is as follows...

 

2♦: basically waiting, but promises an A or K

2♥: As above, but denies an A or K. Not necessarily a bust, could in theory be as strong as QJx QJx QJx QJxx or similar. The point is it denies a quick trick, which often lets opener rule out slam immediately. If we do end up exploring, responders cuebids are now unambiguously shortness.

2NT: 3 kings and at least semi-balanced. I'm not a fan of control responses in general, but I like this one, because it will very often rightside 3N/6N.

Other bids: Natural, good suit. Minimum being something like AKTxx or KQTxxx.

[pescetom]

But without detailed discussion, you might try ..

• 2♦ = REL. Catch all.
• 2♥/2♠/3♣/3♦ = NAT good 6+ card suit
• 2N = BAL 9+ HCP with tenaces.

 

I slightly prefer:

• 2♦ = REL. Catch all.
• 2♥/2♠ = NAT good 5+ card suit
• 3♣/3♦ = NAT good 6+ card suit
• 2N = minors 5-5

 

Never saw any sense in a natural 2NT death reply.

[blackshoe]

From Romex, but usable in a SA or 2/1 context:

 

2♦: 0-1 control (A=2, K=1)

2♥: 2 controls

2♠: 3 controls

2NT: 4 controls

3♣: 5+ controls

3♦: weak two bid in hearts, 6 hearts and about 4-6 points, GF

3♥: weak two bid in spades, 6 spades and about 4-6 points, GF

 

There's more, but this is enough for now. :-)

 

Note: a 2♣ opener usually ought to have at least six controls (there are twelve controls in the deck). Also, the 2♥ and higher bids are forcing to game. It should be no surprise to hear that 2♣-2♦-2NT can be passed.

[Zelandakh]

With neither a hand nor a system, "most acceptable" just has no meaning. If I open 1♣, what is the most acceptable response? Generally speaking, the most acceptable response is the one that best fits your hand given the system being used.