Multi checkup

[the hog]

"♠QJ9xxx ♥x ♦xxx ♣Qxx at favourable first seat is a 3♠ opening, and I don't think it's particularly close"

 

This is a 2S opening in a sane partnership in the first two seats and it is not close.

 

[jillybean]

[hv=pc=n&w=sq542hqjdt862cat3&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=p2dd(14%2B)2h(pass%20correct)?]133|200|multi weak 2 or 20-22[/hv]

 

Poor agreement, but you have to bid 2♠ here?

[DavidKok]

What's wrong with a takeout double? In undiscussed competitive auctions I like to play STOPP doubles - first one is Strength, second TakeOut, third Penalties, fourth Penalties. Partner made the strength one, we make the takeout one.

[jillybean]

What's wrong with a takeout double? In undiscussed competitive auctions I like to play STOPP doubles - first one is Strength, second TakeOut, third Penalties, fourth Penalties. Partner made the strength one, we make the takeout one.

STOPP sounds very useful, but we hadn't discussed it. :)

[jillybean]

[hv=pc=n&w=skjthat3daq954c75&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=2d(multi)p2n(14%2B)p3h(min%20hearts)p?]133|200[/hv]

 

Partner has shown a minimum heart preempt, do you have enough to go to game?

[Tramticket]

What is a minimum for you? xx KQxxxx xxx xxx? I don't want to be in game. To be honest the 2NT inquiry was a bit pushy.

[mikeh]

Style matters. Red v white, first seat, one definitely ought not to have xx KQxxxx xx xxx or the like, unless one hates partner, teammates and the game of bridge.

 

White v red, utterly different.

 

As are red v red and white v white.

 

At imps, I’d probably respond 3D, which for us (and many, though I have no idea how ‘standard’ this is, 2D 3D shows invitational values in both majors…I’m definitely opting for a vulnerable game at imps posited a maximum.

 

At mps, depends on my mood.

[Gilithin]

MikeH: "If his side suit is always a minor, we bid 2N because 3m is probably better than 2H plus, importantly, 2N has preemptive value." This is by far not optimal. 2NT should always show values, not ask for the minor. With the minors as here, bid 3C/3D pass or correct. Who knows you may even pick up their suit .

Jilly after playing 2D Multi for a long time, I have come to the conclusion a 2D opening whould always be some weak 2 and include no strong option. This puts a lot of pressure on the opponents as 2D might even be passed.

2H = H and another is a very poor bid. We gave this up after analysing results as it was a loser.. Play 2H = H and a minor. If you want a bid to show Majors, play 2D as Ekrens.

There is a theory in system design circles that weak 2♠ and 2♦ openings are nearly always effective and a weak 2♥ opening generally less so. So a Muiderberg 2♥ opening is indeed much less effective than the Muiderberg 2♠ but then again the Weak 2♥ opening is much less effective than the Weak 2♠ and counter-intuitively also less effective than the Weak 2♦. For those that want to play both Multi and a "both majors" preempt, a relatively popular structure is 2♦ Weak 2M; 2♥ 4+♥4+♠; 2♠ 5♠4+m. Last time I checked, admittedly a while back now, this was more common than a true (2♦) Ekrens opening.

[pescetom]

For those that want to play both Multi and a "both majors" preempt, a relatively popular structure is 2♦ Weak 2M; 2♥ 4+♥4+♠; 2♠ 5♠4+m. Last time I checked, admittedly a while back now, this was more common than a true (2♦) Ekrens opening.

Looks logical and easy to play. Is 2♥ 2NT natural?

[Gilithin]

Looks logical and easy to play. Is 2♥ 2NT natural?

Different structures are possible but it is usually played as an artificial relay, as in Chris Ryall's write-up from many years back.

[pescetom]

Different structures are possible but it is usually played as an artificial relay, as in Chris Ryall's write-up from many years back.

 

Thanks, that makes a lot of sense and preempts my follow up post with a similar idea :)

 

I can imagine 2♠ developmemts on the basis of Multilandy, but if you have some similar proposal please post.

[Gilithin]

Thanks, that makes a lot of sense and preempts my follow up post with a similar idea :)

 

I can imagine 2♠ developmemts on the basis of Multilandy, but if you have some similar proposal please post.

Yes, by choice I use an identical structure for Muiderberg 2♠ and for Multi-Landy: 2NT relay; 3♣ P/C; 3♦ INV+ with hearts; 3♥ good raise; 3♠ PRE.