[han]

I would like to hear people's opinion about a style of weak 2's that Arend and I have talked about. When white in 1st or 2nd seat, we agreed to open 2M whenever we have a 6-card suit and 8-11 points. A consequence is that if we open 1M and show a six-card suit, we must have a fairly sound hand.

The 2NT response should ask for suit quality and side suits. Perhaps the following structure would make sense:

3C: bad suit, side suit (3D asks, 3M to play)
3D: good suit, side minor. (3H asks)
3M: bad suit, no side suit.
3oM: good suit, side major.
3NT: good suit, no side suit.
4-level: 6-5 or better.

[PriorKnowledge]

I agree with Justin. You have defined weak twos as "Constructive". I believe the three categories are Constructive, Common?, and Destructive (Not sure about middle name).

Constructive weak 2's are sound with restricted values (4 point range, any 6-card suit fits that)
Common would be more loose, say 5-8 with good 6-card suit or 9-10 with most 6-card suits
Destructive might be 5-7 card suits and 4-10. Responder makes no assumption about suit quality.

I think most experts who play a variable weak 2, play Constructive or Common when vul and Common or Destructive when non-vul.

[cherdano]

Jlall, on Jun 7 2005, 03:00 PM, said:

Hopefully you can either open a weak 2 or pass, I assume you don't really have to open ANY 8-11 with a 6 card suit as 2M. Judgement should always be in play. That being said, I think that this method is too restrictive. You lose out on preempting alot of hands, and I don't think narrowing the range is better than the weak 2s that are used today. You will gain in constructive auctions obviously, that is the plus. But you will lose frequency and giving the opps some hard problems.

Note that this is in the context of opening 1M on very light hands. Han described the system with which we were experimenting somewhere in this forum a while ago; basically 1NT is 12-15, 1m is sound, and 1M could be e.g. xx ATxxx KJTx xx. So the system already has many 5cd major preempts opened at the one-level, and the sound weak twos help to control the damage to our constructive bidding.

I dont know whether this system is sound, but I do know it is fun to play (in case you like to bid ).

Passing would be allowed, but if you open it with 1M partner would either expect 12+ hcp or you have to deny the 6th heart, so you rather shouldn't.

Arend

[han]

I agree that "mandatory" shouldn't be taken as an order, judgement is indeed allowed (although in my case it shouldn't be encouraged ). Perhaps I should have written that there are absolutely no requirements on suit quality.

The 8-11 range should be taken with a grain of salt. xx KQJxxx AJ10x x is way too good and should be opened 1M, and any hand with a major suit like KQJxxx should be opened (but perhaps at the three level).

I don't know if the frequency is so much lower than those of "standard" weak 2's. The range is a bit smaller, but we have no suit quality requirements. Also, hands in the upper range (8-11) are much more frequent than those in the lower range (say 0-5). And as Arend said, we do open many hands with a 5-card suit, except with 1M.

[pbleighton]

I play a similar system which opens very light in the majors. We also open *almost* all 8-bad 11 counts with a six card major 2M. If we have an empty suit NV or near empty vul, then we treat it as a 5 card suit and open 1M. 1M-1NT-2M and 1H-1S-2H guarantee a decent 11 or more. In the first seat NV, we may open 2M below 8 if it's *just right*, but pd assumes 8-11 in his responses, and it's the opener's fault if he opens with 6 and we wind up too high.

This has worked out well for us so far. Opening fairly bad 6 card suit 2M has pluses and minuses, and the ability for a 2M rebid to guarantee a normal opening bid is a huge plus.

Peter

[EricK]

Jlall, on Jun 7 2005, 02:00 PM, said:

Hopefully you can either open a weak 2 or pass, I assume you don't really have to open ANY 8-11 with a 6 card suit as 2M. Judgement should always be in play. That being said, I think that this method is too restrictive. You lose out on preempting alot of hands, and I don't think narrowing the range is better than the weak 2s that are used today. You will gain in constructive auctions obviously, that is the plus. But you will lose frequency and giving the opps some hard problems.

You give the opps a different set of problems.

On a large number of hands where you open this 2M bid, the bidding would otherwise go 1M 1NT 2M P. That is if the opponents don't intervene. By opening at the one level you give them more chances to intervene, and it is safer for them to intervene too.

If the bidding starts 2M (P) P then it may be dangerous for fourth hand to compete in case third hand has a misfitting 11 count. That hand can probably be ruled out if the bidding starts 1M 1NT 2M P, or fourth hand may be able to intervene on the first round at the two level.

Eric

[Double !]

If you are considering sound weak 2 bids, you might wish to look into Goldilocks 2-bids. An advantage to them is that they raise the ranges for suit rebids and jum-rebids (the latter can be played as forcing- solves the problem of what to do with an acol 2-bid 1-suited hand). See ETM/Bridge Matters sight for more info.