[Gerben42]

Scoring: IMP

---

Retry.

2♥ Pass to you.

[rogerclee]

2♠ is reasonable. I'd just bid 3♥. 4♥ is okay.

[whereagles]

If opps aren't too experienced, I might try a psychic 2NT or 2♠. If they know what they're doing, you're better off not trying these stunts. Just bid a lead-directing 3♣ (it's LHO who seems to have the spades, so chances are pard will be on lead).

[MickyB]

2♠ and 2N are ridiculous against half-decent opps, they are more likely to have issues with 3♣ IMO.

3♥ or 4♥ depending on our style of weak two. Probably 4♥.

[655321]

3♣
Natural, non-forcing, often implies heart shortage.
Not sure that this plan is cunning enough, probably it will be as successful as any of Baldrick's cunning plans.
Don't like 4♥, as partner also noticed the vulnerability before selecting the 2♥ opening.

[the hog]

655321, on Feb 13 2008, 07:51 PM, said:

3♣
Natural, non-forcing, often implies heart shortage.
Not sure that this plan is cunning enough, probably it will be as successful as any of Baldrick's cunning plans.
Don't like 4♥, as partner also noticed the vulnerability before selecting the 2♥ opening.

Natural non forcing and often implies shortage is a very odd treatment. Why on earth should it be non forcing? This is illogical. How do you fing your high level minor suit fits?
fwiw I would just pass this one.

[655321]

The_Hog, on Feb 13 2008, 08:13 AM, said:

655321, on Feb 13 2008, 07:51 PM, said:

3♣
Natural, non-forcing, often implies heart shortage.
Not sure that this plan is cunning enough, probably it will be as successful as any of Baldrick's cunning plans.
Don't like 4♥, as partner also noticed the vulnerability before selecting the 2♥ opening.

Natural non forcing and often implies shortage is a very odd treatment. Why on earth should it be non forcing? This is illogical. How do you fing your high level minor suit fits?
fwiw I would just pass this one.

LOL
OK, partner has opened a weak 2 at favorable. He is allowed to have a poor hand, he is allowed to have a poor suit, he is allowed to have a 5 card suit. Why should responder, with a decent suit of his own, and a singleton or void in partner's suit, pass and watch partner lose 4 trump tricks when he could be making a contract? This is the (logical) reason for bidding, for a new suit being non-forcing, this is why bidding a new suit tends to have (but does not promise) shortage in partner's suit. We have had this auction on more than one occasion, OTOH I don't remember ever wanting to play in 5m when partner has opened a weak 2.

[MickyB]

655321, on Feb 13 2008, 01:29 PM, said:

The_Hog, on Feb 13 2008, 08:13 AM, said:

655321, on Feb 13 2008, 07:51 PM, said:

3♣
Natural, non-forcing, often implies heart shortage.
Not sure that this plan is cunning enough, probably it will be as successful as any of Baldrick's cunning plans.
Don't like 4♥, as partner also noticed the vulnerability before selecting the 2♥ opening.

Natural non forcing and often implies shortage is a very odd treatment. Why on earth should it be non forcing? This is illogical. How do you fing your high level minor suit fits?
fwiw I would just pass this one.

LOL
OK, partner has opened a weak 2 at favorable. He is allowed to have a poor hand, he is allowed to have a poor suit, he is allowed to have a 5 card suit. Why should responder, with a decent suit of his own, and a singleton or void in partner's suit, pass and watch partner lose 4 trump tricks when he could be making a contract? This is the (logical) reason for bidding, for a new suit being non-forcing, this is why bidding a new suit tends to have (but does not promise) shortage in partner's suit. We have had this auction on more than one occasion, OTOH I don't remember ever wanting to play in 5m when partner has opened a weak 2.

(Especially) over aggressive weak twos, I quite like xfers from 2NT upwards.

[andy_h]

If our preempts aren't crazy, I go for 4H. If it can be, a gentle 3H.

[Fluffy]

it depends on who partner is, partner also knows the vulnerability, normally I'd bid 4♥, but 4♣ and 3♥ are also reasonable.

[kfay]

I have played 3♣ NF with a partner before where we preempted aggressively and it worked fine.

I bid ogust here. Probably won't work. My main reason being that I've wanted to make this bid for a while and have been looking for the hand to bid it on. This isn't really it but it's close.

[pclayton]

MickyB, on Feb 13 2008, 02:10 AM, said:

2♠ and 2N are ridiculous against half-decent opps, they are more likely to have issues with 3♣ IMO.

Don't be so sure.

I tried this psyche in the 2nd day of the LMs against a national champ. He had 5 so-so spades and the 2♠ call shut him up after pard rebid 3♥.

[pclayton]

The_Hog, on Feb 13 2008, 05:13 AM, said:

655321, on Feb 13 2008, 07:51 PM, said:

3♣
Natural, non-forcing, often implies heart shortage.
Not sure that this plan is cunning enough, probably it will be as successful as any of Baldrick's cunning plans.
Don't like 4♥, as partner also noticed the vulnerability before selecting the 2♥ opening.

Natural non forcing and often implies shortage is a very odd treatment. Why on earth should it be non forcing? This is illogical. How do you fing your high level minor suit fits?
fwiw I would just pass this one.

Natural and NF is logical if your weak 2's are made on garbage.

You trade the natural forcing call for all the -150's and -200's that you give up when pard is stuck playing a 5-1.

[kenrexford]

3♦. My reasons:

1. 3♦ was not an option. So, I want to be unusual.
2. 3♦ preempts 2♠, but it also preempts 3♦.
3. The "almost true" psychic sometimes works better that the wild-ass psychic, even if it is not the suit that you are really trying to blast out.

[skjaeran]

I'd try 4♥ with my regular partner, who will have a decent hand. Might make on occasion, or work as a preempt. I like our chances if LHO comes in with 4♠.

[the hog]

655321, on Feb 13 2008, 08:29 PM, said:

The_Hog, on Feb 13 2008, 08:13 AM, said:

655321, on Feb 13 2008, 07:51 PM, said:

3♣
Natural, non-forcing, often implies heart shortage.
Not sure that this plan is cunning enough, probably it will be as successful as any of Baldrick's cunning plans.
Don't like 4♥, as partner also noticed the vulnerability before selecting the 2♥ opening.

Natural non forcing and often implies shortage is a very odd treatment. Why on earth should it be non forcing? This is illogical. How do you fing your high level minor suit fits?
fwiw I would just pass this one.

LOL
OK, partner has opened a weak 2 at favorable. He is allowed to have a poor hand, he is allowed to have a poor suit, he is allowed to have a 5 card suit. Why should responder, with a decent suit of his own, and a singleton or void in partner's suit, pass and watch partner lose 4 trump tricks when he could be making a contract? This is the (logical) reason for bidding, for a new suit being non-forcing, this is why bidding a new suit tends to have (but does not promise) shortage in partner's suit. We have had this auction on more than one occasion, OTOH I don't remember ever wanting to play in 5m when partner has opened a weak 2.

I'm not saying you have to bid 3m as forcing, but I would ask you how you would bid the following if you don't play it as forcing.
AQxxxx
x
Qxxx
xx

Kx
Axx
AKxxx
Axx

This is a hand from a GNOT final about 4 years ago now that pd and I bid to 7D after he opened 2S. How would you bid it if you could't start with a 3D force?

[Cascade]

There is no way we would get to 7♦ and probably not 7♠ with that hand after a weak two opening.

This is the pay-off for opening agressive weak twos.

If your weak twos can be bad five-card suits then you need a new suit to be natural and not forcing.

Luckily not every hand is a grand slam.

[matmat]

3♠. splinter, wtp?

[Karma]

4♣, fit showing.
Assuming competent opps, they will get to 4♠ or similar.

I have already decided that 5♥ will be a good sacrifice and force the opps to make a decision at the 5 level. eg. 5♠ or 6♦ or ...

4♣ should get partner off to the right lead.