Multi

[pilowsky]

Playing in the club yesterday we faced the inevitable multi.

Online descriptions of multi's suggest one of 3 holdings - weak 2H, weak 2S or any 4441 with 17-24.

In Australia it seems more common to remove the 4441 and replace it with a balanced 19-22 ish hand, reserving the strong 2NT to hold a weak hand with both minors.

 

And then we encountered this sequence.

Are transfers typically still on with this approach?

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=pp2d(multi)p2h(p%2Fc)p2np3d(transfer)p3nppp]133|100[/hv]

[mw64ahw]

If 2NT here is the balanced hand I play exactly the same as over a normal 2NT opening so for me 3NT would then show 5233.

[jillybean]

ditto

[Tramticket]

3D will be a transfer.

 

The 3NT bid is a break of transfer, showing whatever they have agreed it to show (we show controls when we break the transfer over 2NT, with 3NT showing control in every suit). 3NT should be alerted of course (at least in England).

[pilowsky]

3D will be a transfer.

 

The 3NT bid is a break of transfer, showing whatever they have agreed it to show (we show controls when we break the transfer over 2NT, with 3NT showing control in every suit). 3NT should be alerted of course (at least in England).

 

Which neatly returns to the question, if you use multi's does that mean that in situations where responder has a strong hand and opener has hearts, the strong hand will end up as dummy?

I don't play multi's it looks like the type of approach where there are multi downsides and very few upsides.

 

Although the pleasure of alerting 2D as a bid best described as "pretty much anything except diamonds (or clubs)" does have something going for it.

 

 

[mw64ahw]

Although the pleasure of alerting 2D as a bid best described as "pretty much anything except diamonds (or clubs)" does have something going for it.

I put the strong minor orientated hands through 2♦ so could be ♣ or ♦

[DavidKok]

Which neatly returns to the question, if you use multi's does that mean that in situations where responder has a strong hand and opener has hearts, the strong hand will end up as dummy?

I don't play multi's it looks like the type of approach where there are multi downsides and very few upsides.

 

Although the pleasure of alerting 2D as a bid best described as "pretty much anything except diamonds (or clubs)" does have something going for it.

It depends on your response scheme. The "almost always respond 2♥" style of multi is one of the weakest ways to play it. Maybe North should have woken up with a weak hand (not an opening) and long hearts (5+) and bid 2♠ P/C instead, incidentally right-siding hearts facing the strong option. But it depends on the rest of the hand.

 

Personally I think having any strong option at all in your multi is a poor idea. If you do insist on including some, I think very strong minor-suited hands are a better choice than the balanced hands (they are too frequent and have too many siding issues) or 4441's (infrequent, so either you cater to them and play an ineffective structure most of the time, or you don't cater to them and cannot catch up). One of the minor benefits of including 4441 hand types is that you can recover if partner makes a weak jump raise of the major, since partner promises length in both majors.

[Cyberyeti]

It depends on your response scheme. The "almost always respond 2♥" style of multi is one of the weakest ways to play it. Maybe North should have woken up with a weak hand (not an opening) and long hearts (5+) and bid 2♠ P/C instead, incidentally right-siding hearts facing the strong option. But it depends on the rest of the hand.

 

Personally I think having any strong option at all in your multi is a poor idea. If you do insist on including some, I think very strong minor-suited hands are a better choice than the balanced hands (they are too frequent and have too many siding issues) or 4441's (infrequent, so either you cater to them and play an ineffective structure most of the time, or you don't cater to them and cannot catch up). One of the minor benefits of including 4441 hand types is that you can recover if partner makes a weak jump raise of the major, since partner promises length in both majors.

 

I disagree with most of this, the first paragraph is fine.

 

Having played the weak/strong multi for a long time before we abandoned it for 3 weak 2s, strong minor is the WORST addition by a long way. Quoting from memory from Sally Horton(now Brock)'s post Venice cup win book she said, we bid thousands of hands in practice, and the strong 2m bids through the multi, much of the time we ended up in the wrong contract without anybody making a palpably bad bid, so we abandoned them.

 

Weak 2, strong balanced, strong 4441 works, although you may want to make the strong balanced a little less frequent by making it stronger than the 2N opener.

 

Also there are schemes I've seen played by team mates where the 3♦ transfer over 2N is GF and 3N shows one of the hands with only 2 hearts, but yes responder should probably have bid 2♠.

[helene_t]

if you use multi's does that mean that in situations where responder has a strong hand and opener has hearts, the strong hand will end up as dummy?

No, because it usually goes something like

2♦-2NT (strong relay)

3♠(max with hearts)-4♥

or

2♦-2NT (strong relay)

3♣(min with hearts)-4♥

or something similar, you may play the rebids after the 2NT relay differently. But in any case, opener doesn't bid the suit he has except sometimes if the opps get awkward, for example

2♦-(4♦)-4♥-(pass)

4♠

 

Conversely, when opener has the strong balanced hand and responder has a weak hand with hearts, it depends on your methods. There are basically two ways of playing the 2♠ response:

- At least invitational opposite a weak two in hearts (but just to play opposite spades)

- As above but could also be a preemptive raise of hearts

 

The second option may seem attractive because it gets the weak hand with long hearts on the table when responder has hearts and opener has the strong variant, but it gets a bit complicated because opener can't just rebid 4♥ to show a max with hearts when responder is not necesarily invitational. You might play something like

2♦-2♠*

2NT**-3♦***

3♠****-4♦*****

4♥-4NT

blah-6♥

 

* various hands including most hands with hearts

** strong bal OR hearts without spade tolerance (just in case responder has some semipositive black two-suiter)

*** I have hearts this time but want to be dummy

**** strong bal but no superaccept

***** retransfer

 

But this gets quite convoluted as it may not be obvious what the 3♠ bid shows.

 

So to keep it manageable, maybe better to agree that 2♠ shows at least an invite opposite hearts, and then opener rebids 3♥ with a minimum or something higher with a max, and the 2NT rebid shows a strong hand.

[DavidKok]

In a weak-only multi there is some benefit to playing

2♦-2♠*; ?

2NT - min with hearts

3♣ - max with hearts

 

* Any hand that wants to play 2♠ opposite spades, or can handle the hearts responses (e.g with a long minor, willingness to play at least 3♥ opposite hearts or sufficiently good spades to rebid 3♠ yourself).

[Tramticket]

In a weak-only multi there is some benefit to playing

2♦-2♠*; ?

2NT - min with hearts

3♣ - max with hearts

 

I can see that it adds definition, but you will often give the opponents an easier route back into the auction.

[Tramticket]

Having played the weak/strong multi for a long time before we abandoned it for 3 weak 2s, strong minor is the WORST addition by a long way. Quoting from memory from Sally Horton(now Brock)'s post Venice cup win book she said, we bid thousands of hands in practice, and the strong 2m bids through the multi, much of the time we ended up in the wrong contract without anybody making a palpably bad bid, so we abandoned them.

 

I agree that strong minor is the worst option to include. This was a hangover from playing Acol Two's and wanting an equivalent in the minor. We played the multi as three-way for years - being weak two in a major or Strong balanced or strong 4441 hands. This scares novice opponents, but having too many options is unhelpful and the 4441 type came up only rarely (and needed some system to optimise the responses), so we dropped the 4441 type. We later dropped the NT option and find that we are able to put much more pressure on opponents, because the 2D bid is non-forcing and LHO can't pass to await clarification - in case he never gets a second bid.

[DavidKok]

I can see that it adds definition, but you will often give the opponents an easier route back into the auction.

In return you get to bid 2♠ far more often, since it doesn't promise heart support. In fact, it allows you to get out in playable contracts more often, and the 2♥ response is no longer a catch-all.

[Cyberyeti]

I agree that strong minor is the worst option to include. This was a hangover from playing Acol Two's and wanting an equivalent in the minor. We played the multi as three-way for years - being weak two in a major or Strong balanced or strong 4441 hands. This scares novice opponents, but having too many options is unhelpful and the 4441 type came up only rarely (and needed some system to optimise the responses), so we dropped the 4441 type. We later dropped the NT option and find that we are able to put much more pressure on opponents, because the 2D bid is non-forcing and LHO can't pass to await clarification - in case he never gets a second bid.

 

We found strong 4441 while uncommon, cost next to nothing, and we actually use 1x-1y-3N for 4441s with support, so we get that bid back, if playing this in multi you want it 18+ rather than the 16+ some recommend

[pescetom]

In a weak-only multi there is some benefit to playing

2♦-2♠*; ?

2NT - min with hearts

3♣ - max with hearts

 

* Any hand that wants to play 2♠ opposite spades, or can handle the hearts responses (e.g with a long minor, willingness to play at least 3♥ opposite hearts or sufficiently good spades to rebid 3♠ yourself).

 

So your explanation to opponents of 2♦-2♥ is?

[helene_t]

So your explanation to opponents of 2♦-2♥ is?

Maybe just "a hand that would have passed a natural 2♥ opening"?

[DavidKok]

So your explanation to opponents of 2♦-2♥ is?

Wants to play 2♥ facing hearts. May have longer spades, or a longer minor. May have long hearts with willingness to play them at the 3-level.

 

Maybe just "a hand that would have passed a natural 2♥ opening"?

This is not an accurate description. I would pass 2♦ with some of those hands, and 2♥ contains multiple hands that would not pass a weak 2♥.

[pescetom]

Wants to play 2♥ facing hearts. May have longer spades, or a longer minor. May have long hearts with willingness to play them at the 3-level.

....

This is not an accurate description. I would pass 2♦ with some of those hands, and 2♥ contains multiple hands that would not pass a weak 2♥.

Thanks and kudos for the accurate description.

I expected no less from you, but am also used to less from many Multi players, even scandalously less albeit in a well meaning way (when I asked for an explanation of this bid in a BBO tournament last week, I received "a 2♥ multi response" which the TD felt was adequate).