[32519]

Which method is best to play over a weak two opening?
1. Pros of each?
2. Cons of each?
3. Or is there a better method?

[nigel_k]

If weak twos are fairly disciplined then my preference in order is: shortage, (high card) feature, then Ogust. But if they are wide ranging Ogust becomes more useful.

[helene_t]

if you often preempt on 5-card suits then the first priority should be to distinguish between 5 and 6. In that case you are short of bidding space so you might think of assigning more meanings t the 3♣ rebid than higher rebids, and to invert the 2♠/nt responses to 2♥.

If 2M promises 6 then I agree with Nigel that Ogust is useful if you like to preempt on bad suits, and otherwise shortage is probably best. Feature can be quite useful but it is helpful to the defence also.

[Phil352]

I currently play shortage ask over disciplined 2M weak 2s, and feature ask over a wider ranging 2D - where the focus is more often finding 3NT than 5D. As mentioned above I don't find Ogust much use once you trust partner to take suit quality and vulnerability/position into account when opening 2x.

[32519]

The flavour appears to be "shortage ask."
1. How does your bidding continue after a weak 2?
2. "Disciplined" is regarded by many as "2-of-the-top-3" or "3-of-the-top-5." You could have opened with a 5 or a 6 count. What does opener do when this weak, especially if the shortness is ♠? Now you force the auction to game?

[aguahombre]

Been there, done that.

Might be helpful. Am pretty sure most posters will not have changed their thoughts since then.

[TylerE]

IMO if your weak 2s are so disclipined that Ogust is not useful, yer doin' it rong.

[StevenG]

Is this discussion about IMPs or MPs or both?

[blackshoe]

Andersen and Zenkel suggested both Ogust and shortage ask: 2NT for the former, and 3♣ for the latter. That's in the context of disciplined preempts containing at least two of the top four honors and a six card suit.

[aguahombre]

TylerE, on 2013-July-03, 07:21, said:

IMO if your weak 2s are so disclipined that Ogust is not useful, yer doin' it rong.

And, in the opinion of others, if your weak 2's are so undisclipined that you need Ogust, you are doing it wrong. I don't think anyone else is doing it right or wrong --- it is just a different choice of style.

Our style for suit quality is different red vs. white, but with one common issue: we don't like to open 2M at any colors with more than one outside feature and try to avoid law subtractors (Q's/J's in short suits, etc.) Opening 1-bids are sometimes quite ugly 11's or good 10's.

Vulnerable (due to the above), we tend to not use 2NT nearly as frequently as others do...reserving it for powerful hands where slam is possible or 3NT might score better ---not for invitational purposes. In most other cases, we have found it simple and effective to just apply "2-3-4"--count our trumps and raise or not raise to that level.

Nonvul, we like to use 2NT to ask for good, normal, bad, and ugly ---the whole hand, not the suit.

New suit responses remain the same, regardless of colors.

[barmar]

In a couple of my partnerships, we play Step Ogust and Feature ask. Step Ogust uses the next suit bid as the asking bid, and this leaves 2NT available to ask for a feature.

[32519]

barmar, on 2013-July-03, 10:26, said:

In a couple of my partnerships, we play Step Ogust and Feature ask. Step Ogust uses the next suit bid as the asking bid, and this leaves 2NT available to ask for a feature.

We can't do this over our weak 2♦ opening. We allow a non-forcing 2♥ or 2♠ bid by responder with no fit as it scores better. Our 2NT over a weak 2♦ is neither OGUST or Feature Ask. Instead it is a direct invitation to 3NT when opener is max for the weak 2 or has the top 3 honours in the suit.

So effectively we would only be able to use step OGUST over 2♥.

[32519]

Nobody offered a reply to my first request so I will try again:

nigel_k, on 2013-July-03, 00:38, said:

If weak twos are fairly disciplined then my preference in order is: shortage, (high card) feature, then Ogust. But if they are wide ranging Ogust becomes more useful.

helene_t, on 2013-July-03, 02:37, said:

If 2M promises 6 then I agree with Nigel that Ogust is useful if you like to preempt on bad suits, and otherwise shortage is probably best. Feature can be quite useful but it is helpful to the defence also.

Phil352, on 2013-July-03, 03:53, said:

I currently play shortage ask over disciplined 2M weak 2s, and feature ask over a wider ranging 2D - where the focus is more often finding 3NT than 5D.

blackshoe, on 2013-July-03, 08:39, said:

Andersen and Zenkel suggested both Ogust and shortage ask: 2NT for the former, and 3♣ for the latter. That's in the context of disciplined preempts containing at least two of the top four honors and a six card suit.

32519, on 2013-July-03, 04:24, said:

The flavour appears to be "shortage ask."
1. How does your bidding continue after a weak 2?
2. "Disciplined" is regarded by many as "2-of-the-top-3" or "3-of-the-top-5." You could have opened with a 5 or a 6 count. What does opener do when this weak, especially if the shortness is ♠? Now you force the auction to game?

[GreenMan]

FWIW I prefer what my friends call 12123 Ogust -- 3♣ shows 1 of the top 3, bad hand; 3♦ 2 of the top 3, bad hand; etc. I tell people that this is to keep my partners from opening a weak 2 on Jxxxx. But seriously, it lets us address suit quality and overall strength with a minimum of fuss.

It may not be the best in theory, but it's proven to be practical and easy to remember, which is my favorite kind of agreement.

[awm]

By far the most important thing is for opener to distinguish max from min. Most often this is all you really need. While the other information (suit quality, feature, shortness) can occasionally help you decide between 3nt vs. 4M, this is pretty rare. It usually only helps when slam is a possibility and in these cases I think shortness is most useful.

Sam and I play the following over 2S-2NT

3C = min with some shortness
3D = max short somewhere other than clubs
3H = max short clubs
3S = min no shortness
3NT = max no shortness

We also have the agreement that after this ask we will only play in spades or notrump (so other bids are either artificial asks of some sort or cuebids).

Over a 2H opening, 2S asks and all is shifted down a step.

[wank]

i play the same as awm over vul weak major 2s and over non-vul weak major 2s ogust. reasoning should be obvious.

[Winstonm]

None of the above. IMO, the bidding opposite a weak major suit opening should be totally different from a weak 2D bid as the main thrust opposite a weak major is the reach game in the major. Because of that, I devised a complete system of asking bids based on loser-count. IMO, this is vastly superior to current standard methods.

Your mileage may vary, of course.

[32519]

If you're still playing Multi then your legs are chopped off on what to use. Multi forces you to use good/bad type responses over the 2NT asking bid. Feature Ask or Shortness Ask do not exist for you.

[wank]

32519, on 2013-July-03, 22:49, said:

If you're still playing Multi then your legs are chopped off on what to use. Multi forces you to use good/bad type responses over the 2NT asking bid. Feature Ask or Shortness Ask do not exist for you.

you asked about weak 2s. a multi isn't a weak 2.

[32519]

wank, on 2013-July-03, 23:01, said:

you asked about weak 2s. a multi isn't a weak 2.

Wow? 80% plus of all Multi's are a weak 2 in either major. Many play a weak only Multi. Now your 80% plus becomes 100%.