[RMB1]

If 2 ♦ shows spades and may have another suit, then it may not have 5 ♦.
If 2 ♦ shows spades and another suit (4+) then it may not show spades and diamonds, although it may have three suits including diamonds and spades (showing spades and a "round" suit).

You can play 2 ♦ as weak with 5+ M (specification does not show diamonds) and agree to open 2 ♦ with 5M+4♦ but not 5M+5♦.

You can not play 2 ♦ as weak with 5+M and 4+ in another suit.

You can play 2 ♦ as weak with two suits, neither of which is diamonds, with 5+M; and agree to open 2 ♦ with 5M+4♦+4♣ or 5M+4OM+4♦.

Robin
Robin

[NickRW]

RMB1, on Jul 4 2009, 11:28 AM, said:

If 2 ♦ shows spades and may have another suit, then it may not have 5 ♦.
If 2 ♦ shows spades and another suit (4+) then it may not show spades and diamonds, although it may have three suits including diamonds and spades (showing spades and a "round" suit).

You can play 2 ♦ as weak with 5+ M (specification does not show diamonds) and agree to open 2 ♦ with 5M+4♦ but not 5M+5♦.

You can not play 2 ♦ as weak with 5+M and 4+ in another suit.

You can play 2 ♦ as weak with two suits, neither of which is diamonds, with 5+M; and agree to open 2 ♦ with 5M+4♦+4♣ or 5M+4OM+4♦.

Robin
Robin

You guys need to read your Orange Book, rather than make up or pass on erroneous rules.

2008 Orange Book, on section not revised in the 2009 version, from the part on level 4 openings, said:

11 G 10 General
Two of a Suit openings may be played as any one or two of the following:
(a) Strong: Any combination of meanings provided that it promises a minimum strength of ‘Extended Rule of 25’ (see 10 B 4).
(b ) Any combination of meanings which either:
  (1) includes one specified suit of at least four cards; or
  (2) has a specification which does not include holding at least four cards in the suit bid, and does not include two-suiters where the suit bid is the longer suit.
Notes:
(i) Responder is expected to explore game possibilities if his hand justifies it opposite the stronger types of his partner’s opening bid.
(ii) An example of item (b )(2) for clarification: it is permitted to play a 2♦ opening as ‘weak with Spades or Clubs’; this would not preclude a pair from opening such a bid on a hand that happened to have a second suit of Diamonds, since length in Diamonds is not part of the specification. But it is not permitted to play it as ‘Spades or Clubs with a second suit of Hearts or Diamonds’, since length in Diamonds is part of the specification.
(iii) Note that there is no limit to the number of types of strong hand included under (a), nor to the number of types included under (b ) so long as the requirement (1) is followed, or alternatively so long as the requirement (2) is followed.

11G10 b1 clearly says the bid can include one specified suit of 4 cards - it does not say that the suit specified needs to be the suit actually bid. Nor does it say that other suits have or have not to be specified - so long as there is one specified (anchor) suit.

Further emphasis is given to this in note iii of the same regulation.

Nick

[RMB1]

I do think I know what I'm talking about - I have read the Orange Book - many times as a reviewer and as a TD. If a bid shows spades and another suit that is a specification that includes holding 4 diamonds, because the other suit may be diamonds.

Robin

[NickRW]

RMB1, on Jul 4 2009, 08:47 PM, said:

I do think I know what I'm talking about - I have read the Orange Book - many times as a reviewer and as a TD. If a bid shows spades and another suit that is a specification that includes holding 4 diamonds, because the other suit may be diamonds.

Robin

LOL

[Quantumcat]

I think playing multis only gains when your opponents don't know how to defend against it, and muddle themselves up. If they do, it is way easier to get to the right spot after a multi than after a weak 2, because you have the extra option of passing in various places. You also can't pre-empt effectively (by the time you know what opener's suit is and want to bid 4H/S - the opponents have already talked) and like lots of people mentioned, constructive bidding is made much more difficult. It's been said that they free up 2H/S to include a minor suit, but who does that help? The opponents when they declare! Nobody wants to play in a minor game and more often than not, it will be the opponents playing since you have a weak hand.

Does anyone like this system of pre-empts? They are called Brad Twos.

In 1st/2nd seat:
- 2♣ is 4+/4+ clubs and spades
- 2♦ is 4+/4+ diamonds and spades
- 2♥ is 4+/4+ hearts and spades
- 2♠ is 5+ spades

In 3rd seat:
- 2♣ is 4+/4+ clubs and hearts
- 2♦ is 4+/4+ diamonds and hearts
- 2♥ is 5+ hearts
- 2♠ is 5+ spades
- 1♠ could be a psyche with short spades

[PrecisionL]

NEITHER!

The Poll needs a third option as I prefer to play neither Multi or Weak Twos as do some top players (see BB convention cards).

We play constructive twos in all suits:

10-14 hcp and 6-cards if a minor without a 4-card major.

5332 or 6322 if the major is weak. Descriptive and semi-preemptive with some defense. However, see Fred's post on weak twos when he was playing with Ekeblad - Rubin.

Larry

[fred]

Quantumcat, on Sep 4 2009, 07:29 AM, said:

I think playing multis only gains when your opponents don't know how to defend against it, and muddle themselves up. If they do, it is way easier to get to the right spot after a multi than after a weak 2, because you have the extra option of passing in various places. You also can't pre-empt effectively (by the time you know what opener's suit is and want to bid 4H/S - the opponents have already talked) and like lots of people mentioned, constructive bidding is made much more difficult. It's been said that they free up 2H/S to include a minor suit, but who does that help? The opponents when they declare! Nobody wants to play in a minor game and more often than not, it will be the opponents playing since you have a weak hand.

IMO this is a very superficial analysis much of which is nonsense.

Quote

Does anyone like this system of pre-empts? They are called Brad Twos.

In 1st/2nd seat:
- 2♣ is 4+/4+ clubs and spades
- 2♦ is 4+/4+ diamonds and spades
- 2♥ is 4+/4+ hearts and spades
- 2♠ is 5+ spades

In 3rd seat:
- 2♣ is 4+/4+ clubs and hearts
- 2♦ is 4+/4+ diamonds and hearts
- 2♥ is 5+ hearts
- 2♠ is 5+ spades
- 1♠ could be a psyche with short spades

Some free advice (which I am offering because you seem young, smart, nice, and genuinely interested in bridge and which may be worth nothing more to you than what you are paying for it):

Your opening paragraph strongly suggests to me that, if you really want to be a very successful player one day, you should spend some more time focusing on simplicity and less time experimenting with various types of 2-bid (and other aspects of systems design).

Spend a few years getting very good at the basics. You will have plenty of time after that to experiment with systems as you see fit.

Of course if your goal is to mostly have a good time (as opposed to being a very successful player) then do whatever turns you on.

Hope you won't be insulted by the above. I am trying to be helpful and my judgment from reading your posts suggests that the sooner you learn this the better for you.

Perhaps needless to say, there are other people out there who I think would benefit from listening to the above free advice.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[gnasher]

fred, on Sep 4 2009, 02:31 PM, said:

Some free advice (which I am offering because you seem young ...)

Doesn't the final word in that extract guarantee that the advice will be ignored?

[NickRW]

Quantumcat, on Sep 4 2009, 07:29 AM, said:

...Does anyone like this system of pre-empts? They are called Brad Twos...

I'll be a tiny bit more encouraging than Fred - sounds like fun for a match point session if you want to mix it up. Not my general cup of tea though - I prefer to be able to regularly clock up comfortably the right side of 50% or better, rather than get some 60s and some 40s.

Nick