What's your style?

[jillybean]

[hv=pc=n&n=sthjdaq8765cjt973]133|100[/hv]

 

1st seat, NV, MP's

[hrothgar]

[hv=pc=n&n=sthjdaq8765cjt973]133|100[/hv]

 

1st seat, NV, MP's

 

If have some way to show both minors at a high level, I do so

Otherwise, I pass

 

I would not be surprised to be bidding 4NT at my next opportunity

 

My second choice would be to open 4D

[DavidKok]

Too weak for a 4NT opener for me. If I played 2NT as preemptive with both minors I would bid that, but I don't. I'd pass for lack of good alternatives. I know people who would open this 2♦/3♦ and then bid clubs on the second round, but I'm not one of them.

 

Also, does 'NV' mean 'nobody vulnerable'? Or just 'not vulnerable'?

[jillybean]

If have some way to show both minors at a high level, I do so

Otherwise, I pass

 

I would not be surprised to be bidding 4NT at my next opportunity

 

My second choice would be to open 4D

Is 4♦:4NT to play?

 

 

Too weak for a 4NT opener for me. If I played 2NT as preemptive with both minors I would bid that, but I don't. I'd pass for lack of good alternatives. I know people who would open this 2♦/3♦ and then bid clubs on the second round, but I'm not one of them.

 

Also, does 'NV' mean 'nobody vulnerable'? Or just 'not vulnerable'?

 

Nobody vulnerable, how should I write it?

[DavidKok]

I'd probably just write "nobody vul.", but for all I know 'NV' could be standard. Nobody vulnerable is the most aggressive part-score vulnerability, so 2NT for the minors would be extremely helpful right now. It's still a pass for me, but the people who open 2♦ (weak two) and rebid 3♣ have my sympathies.

[LBengtsson]

I want to make as good a descriptive bid as possible therefore weak 2♦. tell partner what you have not got - any defence except maybe the ♦A. there are 24 cards unaccounted in the major suits. the probability that the opponents have a fit in one major suit is very high.

 

by bidding you might take away some gadgets such as splinters, bergen raises and jacoby 2NT so it makes it more difficult for the opps. to judge their potential contract. partner could possibly raise you in ♦ to make matters even more difficult. passing and trying to introduce the suits later gives the opps. space.

 

in a competitive auction you might be able to introduce ♣ later. partner will be in no doubt what sort of hand you have. I open 2♦, maybe 3♦ if the suit was better. you are telling the truth first bid.

[pescetom]

Looks like a bread and butter weak 2♦ at any vulnerability, if that is your agreement. Not worth 3♦ and just good enough to rebid the clubs.

[mw64ahw]

We play 2NT as preemptive 5+ minors/9PT 5+ both minors

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&n=sthjdaq8765cjt973]133|100|'JllyBean' t1st seat, NV, MP's

+++++++++++++++++++

I rank

1. 3♦

2. 2♦ intending to rebid 3/4♣

[/hv]

 

 

[Winstonm]

I'd probably just write "nobody vul.", but for all I know 'NV' could be standard. Nobody vulnerable is the most aggressive part-score vulnerability, so 2NT for the minors would be extremely helpful right now. It's still a pass for me, but the people who open 2♦ (weak two) and rebid 3♣ have my sympathies.

 

I would open 2D - I don't know what I would do after that but would not automatically bid clubs.

[paulg]

Easy 3♦ for me at Love All and much closer to 4♦ than 2♦ (which I think is a little wet when 1-1 in the majors).

[jillybean]

I've been enjoying learning/playing Multi 2♦ so I would have 2nt available to show this hand.

 

With my usual system, 2nt is not available. I have the thought of opening this 1♦ (65!) and then, depending on the bidding, rebidding 2♣.

It's just a thought. I haven't acted on it yet, this wasn't my hand.

 

A the table it was opened a weak 2♦, partner responded 2♥.

[DavidKok]

With my usual system, 2nt is not available. I have the thought of opening this 1♦ (65!) and then, depending on the bidding, rebidding 2♣.

It's just a thought. I haven't acted on it yet, this wasn't my hand.

 

A the table it was opened a weak 2♦, partner responded 2♥.

1♦ is horrifying.

 

2♦-2♥, probably forcing? Down the rabbit hole we go! 3♣ and let us hope partner can take a joke. What is our plan over a 3♥ rebid? And what would have happened had we passed initially?

[AL78]

I play 3♣ as weak, both minors with one partner so would open that. Failing that I would open a weak 2♦, and if I wasn't playing that I would pass and hope to come in with a 2NT both minors bid if partner can't open.

[Gilithin]

Assuming no specialised gadgets are available, if I play 3 weaks I would open 2♦ planning on a 4♣ rebid. If I did not have a weak 2♦ available (Multi, Benji, etc) I would open 3♦ if the opps are NV and 4♦ if the opps are Vulnerable.

[pilowsky]

Is 4♦:4NT to play?

 

 

 

 

Nobody vulnerable, how should I write it?

 

nil Vul.

All Vul.

NS Vul

EW Vul

I'm feeling a bit Vul.

[Gilithin]

Nobody vulnerable, how should I write it?

Thanks to pillowsky for pointing this quote out - the usual term in newspaper or magazine columns is Love All.

[jillybean]

1♦ is horrifying.

Only a thought, fortunately I didn't hold that hand.

 

2♦-2♥, probably forcing? Down the rabbit hole we go! 3♣ and let us hope partner can take a joke. What is our plan over a 3♥ rebid? And what would have happened had we passed initially?

2♦ - 2♥ probably forcing? isn't that 100% forcing?

 

If you pass initially it will most likely go P (P) 1♥ (P)

 

V

NV

V vs. NV

NV vs. V

[DavidKok]

2♦ - 2♥ probably forcing? isn't that 100% forcing?

It is 100% forcing in standard, though I personally play it as NF. I've been informed this is sufficiently unexpected that one opponent even told me I had to alert it, which is technically incorrect but a good idea in the spirit of full disclosure. I've been getting funny looks whenever I alerted this bid ever since.

[paulg]

Traditional British nomenclature, where the question is about NS actions:

NV v V - green (aka favourable; EW Game)

NV v NV - white (Love All)

V v V - amber (Game All)

V v NS - red (unfavourable, NS Game)

[Cyberyeti]

It is 100% forcing in standard, though I personally play it as NF. I've been informed this is sufficiently unexpected that one opponent even told me I had to alert it, which is technically incorrect but a good idea in the spirit of full disclosure. I've been getting funny looks whenever I alerted this bid ever since.

 

We play it highly encouraging but not forcing, the more wide range your weak 2s, and ours are VERY wide the better it is to play not absolutely forcing.

[DavidKok]

It's simply NF for me. Partner may raise if we struck gold (for example a 3-card suit) and is expected to pull with a void, and in all other situations pass is normal. So not that encouraging.

 

Generally we only preempt with hands that have low defence and are a lot stronger in the suit bid than in any other suit. Typically partner can count on almost nothing at all in support of a game in a different suit, so investigating the best 4M game is actually very low priority (but we retain the option by starting with 2NT). If a hand doesn't match these criteria it is typically better to pass instead of jump the bidding. On the other hand, our preempts are extremely wide-ranged. Nobody vulnerable first seat I would bid 2♥ with both ♠xx, ♥KQJxxx, ♦Ax, ♣xxx and with ♠xx, ♥JT9xxx, ♦xx, ♣xxx.

[Cyberyeti]

It's simply NF for me. Partner may raise if we struck gold (for example a 3-card suit) and is expected to pull with a void, and in all other situations pass is normal. So not that encouraging.

 

Generally we only preempt with hands that have low defence and are a lot stronger in the suit bid than in any other suit. Typically partner can count on almost nothing at all in support of a game in a different suit, so investigating the best 4M game is actually very low priority (but we retain the option by starting with 2NT). If a hand doesn't match these criteria it is typically better to pass instead of jump the bidding. On the other hand, our preempts are extremely wide-ranged. Nobody vulnerable first seat I would bid 2♥ with both ♠xx, ♥KQJxxx, ♦Ax, ♣xxx and with ♠xx, ♥JT9xxx, ♦xx, ♣xxx.

 

We preempt very aggressively in first seat and don't restrict ourselves to pure hands (although your first hand opens 1 for us). x, xxxx(x), xxx, xxxx(x) opens 2♥ for us (at favourable) as does xx, AKJxxx, xx, xxx but also Jxxx, KQ10xx, x, xxx, hence we use change of suit on hands where we don't want partner to go nuts on a good misfitting hand, and can pass with rubbish.

[DavidKok]

x, xxxx(x), xxx, xxxx(x) opens 2♥ for us (at favourable) as does xx, AKJxxx, xx, xxx but also Jxxx, KQ10xx, x, xxx

I would never preempt with the first or third hand (unless I had these specific 2-suiter preemptive bids, which I also don't love much but if you play them you have to use them). There are too many ways for it to lead to a bad score - missing your best suit, preempting partner without clear direction, partner overbidding or even phantom sacrifices all have a higher chance than normal on those hands.

 

The middle hand is an easy 3♥ for me at favourable first seat but you could mastermind it with 2♥.

[Cyberyeti]

The middle hand is an easy 3♥ for me at favourable first seat but you could mastermind it with 2♥.

 

AKJ 6 times and out is a 3 opener but KQJ 6x and an ace opens 2 ? First seat at all vuls we open it 2.

 

Our opening bids only show the bid suit and are 4+ cards first and third. They occasionally contain longer clubs