Help
awm, on 2019-January-12, 07:19, said:
I didn't say no four-card side suit.. it's no four-card side major. I think it's pretty common to bid this way.
Anyway, I dealt 100 hands where opener has a weak 2♠ and responder has 17+ HCP (I figured most hands with less strength would either pass or raise spades to some level). It looked like the best contract was:
2♠: 8 times
4♠: 74 times
6♠: 9 times
7♠: 1 time
3NT: 2 times
4♥: 3 times
7NT: 2 times (7♠ had the same tricks both times)
6♦: 1 time
So only one in a hundred where we wanted to play in a minor, and this was conditioned on the strong responder hand. The one 6♦ hand involved a 6-4 fit and Ax opposite Kxxxxx in spades (which could be ruffed good for discards, but would always have a second loser in spades or notrump).
Anyway, I dealt 100 hands where opener has a weak 2♠ and responder has 17+ HCP (I figured most hands with less strength would either pass or raise spades to some level). It looked like the best contract was:
2♠: 8 times
4♠: 74 times
6♠: 9 times
7♠: 1 time
3NT: 2 times
4♥: 3 times
7NT: 2 times (7♠ had the same tricks both times)
6♦: 1 time
So only one in a hundred where we wanted to play in a minor, and this was conditioned on the strong responder hand. The one 6♦ hand involved a 6-4 fit and Ax opposite Kxxxxx in spades (which could be ruffed good for discards, but would always have a second loser in spades or notrump).
I once constructed a response system based on the assumption that whenever partner opened a weak two in a major, that major would be the best chance for game or slam. It was based on losing trick count step responses by opener. You may think about something similar as it is not that difficult to figure out or you can find mine here: https://www.bridgewo...age_200608.html