[pbleighton]

What method do you prefer over a strong 2C opener (other than not playing it )

I've been playing a primitive 2D=waiting. I hear rumblings that I should play a second bid of the next suit up as a bust, or else play an immediate 2H as super negative. Controls are also popular. What do you like?

If you like the 2H super negative or the second bid of the next suit up as a bust, do this take away the GF, and how weak are these bids? I currently play 2C as absolutely GF, except after the sequence 2C-2D-2NT.

Peter

[blackshoe]

As the TD at a recent Sectional told me "people are bidding 2♣ on weaker and weaker hands these days". This after an opponent opened 2♣ on S AKQJxxxx and out, and then jumped to 4♠ over his partner's 2♦ negative. Our teammates, expecting opener to have rather more than ten HCP misdefended, and allowed 4♠ to make. We got snookered.

Paul Soloway suggested that a 2♣ opener ought to have more quick tricks than losers. That seems to work, provided you play that if opener bids and rebids his suit after a negative (or "double negative") response, responder can pass.

There are basically four ways to play responses to 2♣:

1. 2♦ negative (usually 0-7 HCP). Often coupled with "cheaper minor second negative" to allow bailout below game. This is IMO the worst of the bunch.

2. 2♥ "double negative" (0-4 HCP or so). 2♦ is then GF, with at least a couple of queens, but no good suit. With a good suit, you show it. 2NT shows hearts.

3. "Step responses" showing HCP. 2♦=0-3, 2♥=4-6, etc. I was wrong. This is the worst of the bunch.

4. Control showing responses. There are several possibilities here. I like 2♦=0 or 1, 2♥=2, 2♠=3, 2NT=4, 3♣=5,3♦/=transfers, showing a weak 2 in ♥/♠ respectively. This works particularly well when 2♣ is absolutely FG unless opener rebids 2NT showing 23-24 HCP.

I like Romex, which has some interesting agreements in this area. First, when looking at strong balanced hands, the number of controls is key; HCP are secondary. Second, when looking at strong unbalanced hands, LTC and controls are key - such a hand must have no more than 3 losers, and at least 6 controls. Third, Romex has four strong opening bids, not just the two of SA or 2/1.

The biggest problem with having only 2♣ and 2NT as the strong opening bids is that there are hands too strong for an opening one bid and too weak for 2♣. You end up either stretching your one bids too far up, or reducing your 2♣ bids too far down. Romex fixes that problem by opening those hands with one of its four forcing openings.

If I can't play Romex, I'd go with Soloway's rule, and either option 2 or option 4 above. I should probably add that I've read somewhere that Benito Garrozo, who kind of invented control showing responses back in the 1950s, now believes that it's more important to show shape than controls. <shrug>

[zasanya]

A good approach appears to be:
2♣= Need 1 trick from P for game in suit contract or 23+
--2♦= Negative : less than 1 and half trick
--2♥♠=5 card and and 1 and half trick
--2NT=balanced 1and half trick
--3♣/♦ 5 card and 1 and half trick
After the positive responses 5 level contract should be safe and there is enough room for slam investigation.
If responder is 4-4-4-1 and positive, bid NT or best 4 carder suit
After 2♦ negation 2♥ is Game in hand in suit or 25+ balanced.
Then 2♠ denies 1 trick and other bids show 1 trick and appropriate suit or NT pattern.
Calls other than 2♥ show needing 1 trick for Game.Responder takes appropriate action.
Coupled with minorwood and exclusion blackwood and rkcb should lead to reasonable contract.I must add that that my multi includes 19-20 balanced and 9 playing tricks in minor apart from weak majors.

[awm]

Opening 2♣ takes up a lot of your space already. It seems like any method where responder often bids above 2♦ on non-slam hands is going to have some issues, since opener now has to bid the first suit of the auction at the three-level (okay unless it's spades).

I prefer a method where 2♦ is almost automatic, and other bids show something very specific. Using the cheapest 3-level as 2nd negative works out okay (but I wouldn't play a scheme where 2♦ maxes out at some low number of hcp, I want to bid 2♦ generally on balanced hands). I've played 2♥ negative in a lot of partnerships, which works out quite well when you don't bid 2♥ but is kind of shaky when you do. Paradox responses are also interesting (2♦ GF and all other bids show bad hands).

[helene_t]

My father plays control responses and is quite happy with that. But I think it's related to his strict requirements for 2♣: either a self-supporting suit or a balanced hand.

For me, control responses would be unplayable since I like to open 2♣ with all kind of shapes except for two-suiters with longer/stronger minor.

Playing 2♥ as an immediate 2nd negative has the advantage that you don't have to to define some 2nd bid as second negative. Also, the 2NT rebid becomes forcing so opener can bid 2NT with a GF hand. It does have the disadvantage that responder needs some other way to show hearts. 2NT can be used for that purpose. Of course, this prevents opener from showing spades at the 2-level.

Over here (Netherlands) the experts seem to discourage the 2NT response to 2♣ in its natural meaning. If you play otherwise natural responses, you might use it for 5-5 minors.

[Wackojack]

Have you considered Paradox responses?
2d = worth a trick for either major or better
2h = Trash or trick for spades
2s = Worth a trick for hearts but not spades

Worth a trick would be 3 or doubleton high honour

2nt = tricks in minors, no tricks in majors
3cd = good suit source of tricks opposite Ax

Can be used as near game force (if you like) with major or minor suit hand
e.g 2c 2h 2s 3c(2nd neg) 3s can be passed.

These responses allow many good inferences for slam exploration particularly after a 2d response. Possible disadvantage is wrong siding and room consuming 2c 2h 3h.

[Al_U_Card]

How about CaSh (Controls and Shape)?

2D = 0-1 control any shape (A=2 controls, K=1)
2H/S = any 2 controls with 5+ cards in the suit bid
2NT = any 2 controls and 4432 or 4333 shape
3C = any 2 controls and one 5 card minor
3D = any 3 controls and one 5 card minor
3H/S = any 3 controls with 5+ cards in the suit bid
3NT = any 3 controls and 4432 or 4333 shape.
etc.

Have used it for years and it gets in the way as much as any other "system" but shows you when you have a guaranteed fit for your suit (the NT bids) and how high you can go.....as well as being easy on the memory banks...

[glen]

blackshoe, on Feb 18 2007, 01:16 AM, said:

2. 2♥ "double negative" (0-4 HCP or so). 2♦ is then GF, with at least a couple of queens, but no good suit. With a good suit, you show it. 2NT shows hearts.

Around here 2♥ as the bust hand response (sometimes called "super bust") is becoming very popular, and we were at table yesterday where a pair switched to this method. The way it is played here, 2♦ does not deny a good suit, but it is "waiting" (a note posted at a local club recently indicates that this "waiting with values" bid is not alertable). To make a positive bid of 2♠+ one still needs 8+ and a good suit.

There are options, such as 2NT could be the positive for ♥s, and all balanced 4+ should respond 2♦. Likewise 2♠ should be the positive for ♥s and 2NT the positive for ♠s. Or 2♠ could be the positive with a five card major, and 2NT the positive with a six card or longer major.

However none of these options are played around here, as the tendence is to avoid the space consuming positives, and just bid 2♦ with values.

[inquiry]

I follow Chris Ryall's strong two club method... to read about it, see

Paradox responses to 2♣

[thebiker]

I play Sharples responses to 2C
2D is a -ve
A positive is given on:
(a) 1.5 Quick Tricks or better
or ( 8 points including 1 Ace or 2 Kings
or © A major suit playing for 5 tricks (with the odds) opposite Ax or Kx)
responder must have the A or K of the suit

Responders precise hand type can be confirmed later via the bidding and the reply to openers 4NT inquiry

2C +ve
bid bid
4NT asks
5C 1K
5D 2K
5H 1A +
5S 1.5 QT
5NT 2.0 QT etc

[FrancesHinden]

A few observations.
1. The best way to improve 2C auctions is to improve the judgement of the weak hand. IMO, methods in which the weak hand shows exact points or exact number of controls are inferior, as they take up too much room before you can start exploring for the best denomination. They can be more successful than alternatives because they take away the need for the weak hand to use judgement. The weak hand shows points, controls etc and strong hand selects the final contract. Good when all that matters is what controls the weak hand has, not so good when opener is strong and balanced, and the weak hand's distribution is important.

And remember that the majority of strong 2C openers are strong and balanced...

2. The absolute best method of responses depends on your 2C opening. I prefer to play 2C as absolutely game forcing or 23-24 balanced. I then don't need to bother with a "second negative" immediate response, because opener is driving game whatever my hand. I also don't then bother with delicate auctions to stop in 3M. I personally believe that by keeping the 2C opening so strong my slam bidding is vastly improved and that it is easier to find the right game - but I may sometimes play at the 1-level with game on.

3. I prefer to retain the abilty to make a natural positive (5+ card suit with 2 of the top 3 honours (or AJ10), 8+ HCP) in any suit. I play these as forcing to 4NT (except 2C - 2M - 3M - 4M can be passed). These are the easiest and fastest ways to get to slam. I have gained lots and lots of imps by having nice simple auctions starting 2C - positive when the opponents have been playing complicated methods and can't work out their tricks. Again, a positive response works very well opposite a strong balanced hand, and a strong balanced or semi-balanced hand is the most common 2C opening. Yes, for any given hand you can usually construct an auction that gets to the right spot without making a natural positive, but it usually has some pitfalls en route.

4. Don't believe people who say that "all experts" play Kokish (2C - 2D - 2H strong balanced or hearts). While the Kokish rebid does have merit, it also has a downside. I play it in one partnership and not in another, and both approaches show gains and losses. Kokish obviously gains on the mega-balanced hands as youy don't have to rebid 3NT (and also with the gaining of a 3NT rebid for minor-suited hands), but it can hurt the auction when opener has hearts; it's not a no-loss method.

5. Discuss the meaning of bids & calls in competition at some length. A 2C opening is ripe to be pre-empted and/or psyched against, and you need to be clear when double is penalties, and when a cue bid is psyche-revealing.

[Gerben42]

I do the same as Ben (i.e. Chris Ryall's methods). It's about as good as it gets playing the strong 2♣.

About Kokish relay: I prefer not to have it, as it simplifies life when you have ♥, which is more often than the few times you really have a big bal. hand. BTW playing the Ryall method, 2♣ - 2♦ - 2NT should not be passed, and 2♣ - 2M - 3N can be lots of things since partner already said he isn't interested.

[Winstonm]

I was dissatisfied by current methods so came up with my own. The object was to have a strong NT show and put the weak hand in charge or place opener in charge when a 1-suited hand is held. This is my structure and as far as I know not played by anyone else:
2C=9 or more trick hand, strong NT, or very strong 2-suited hand.
Responder's bids:

2D: virtually all hands except agreed upon positives (agreed upon positves are either control requirements with no suit requirement or suit requirement with no control requirement.)
2H-transfer positive (opener can accept and ask or bid something else)
2S-transfer positive
2N-transfer positive
3C-transfer positve

Opener's rebids after 2C-2D
2H=22-23 NT after which 2S relays to 2N
2S=any one-suited hand
2N=24-25 NT
3C/3D/ show at least 5/5 suit bid + hearts, forcing to 4 level
3H=hearts/spades at least 5/5 majors, game force
3S=spades/clubs at least 5/5 and forcing to 4 level.
4C=spades/diamonds at least 5/5, game force
4D=5/5 minors, game force
4H=6+/5 minors, game force
4S=5/6+ minors game force
4N=6/6 minors

3N-gambling solild suit bid but strong.

After 2C-2D
2S=one suited hand, responder shows a second negative or has methods to show a balanced or semi-balanced semi-positive as well as positives that do not fit the positive criteria, or a semi-positve unbalanced hand that does not fit the criteria for a postive.

[mikeh]

I have long played 2♥ immediate 2nd negative: some play it as no Ace or King and less than, say, 5 hcp (thus they bid 2♦ with 2 Queens and a Jack). I prefer that 2♦ always shows at least a K or an A, thus my 2♥ could be a lot of quacks, altho in real life, it is rare to hold as many as 6 hcp with no A or K.

Kokish has never been a problem for me, in terms of losing the ♥ suit, and I may be missing something when I read comments suggesting that there is this downside. After 2♦, 2♥ is either natural or big notrump. Responder bids 2♠.

Now opener can show a second suit or a long ♥ suit via natural bidding, and 2N shows the notrump. Sure, one will sometimes have a 6322 hand with ♥s and need to decide whether to continue 3♥ or, with appropriate values, 2N. But this is very rarely an issue, and I wonder what else I am missing. Oh, responder loses the ability to bid 2♠ naturally: but if we rebid 2N, we are ok anyway, and he can always rebid 3♠...so we lose only a tiny amount of accuracy there.

I toyed with control showing responses, but they tend to get in the way of constructive bidding by prempting the auction.

As for positive responses, I make them only when I hold a very simple hand. 2♦ is the default positive, and it does not deny a good suit (or two). I find that allowing opener room to clarify his hand allows for much smoother auctions. Opener will almost always hold either a balanced hand or a one-suiter: as those familiar with my posts on this topic know, I will open some very powerful 2 and 3 suited hands at the one-level. So with a complex hand, responder stays out of the way.

I also tend to be a 'big' 2♣ opener: I know that this is against a common trend in expert bidding, where 2♣ is opened on more and more hands. I play it as forcing to 2N, 3♠ or 4 of any other suit. While this decreases the frequency of use compared to some, it makes responder's job much easier: and I agree with Frances in that in my view, successful 2♣ methods are dependent on responder's judgment far more than on that of opener.

[Impact]

With due respect to may here, the common "2D waiting" is yet another move to attemptto retain control bythe "substitution of your expert judgement" when actually passing information is superior.

The common desire to control the auction (unsuitably) as opposed to allowing a GF to determine whether the assets held by responder match sufficient to proceed past game, seems to me to be questionable.

It leads to terrible inconsistencies (how many extras has he shown etc) and catch-ups - and that abomination of responder taking control by Bw/RKCB etc after a 2C Opening.

Control responses are fine if you keep a decent standard for the 2C Opening (GF or 23+bal seems fair).

The caveat that I make is that the 2NT response to 2C should NEVER be natural or merely a number of controls: typically as per Rosenkranz recommnedations it should take out a subset of hands which are hard to express from the minimum range. Typically, since you are raising the auction by a full level the obvious answer is that they should have some particular dramatic feature - and again a 6 card suit heade by at least QJ is a sensible alternative (then if you respond with 2D=0-1 control, and rebid the same suit later in a natural auction implying 6+cards, opener knows the suit is weaker - crucially important for slam purposes).

By relaying over the 2NT response for the suit below the real suit, it allows opener to anme the denomination (protecting the strong hand) AND by then bidding the suit at the 3-level inquire about side shortage.....

Most of the rest of the time after a control response Opener will bid 2NT with the balanced hands (GF opposite 2H or higher) and you can use the whole suite of responses in your complex for responder; otherwise bidding proceeds naturally when a fit is found and openre has the advantage of knowing whether the combined control count is sufficient to warrant further investigation or not.
This works BECAUSE you are committed to game whereas over strong Club etc there is no guarantee AND the possibility of relatively equal distribution of assets between the partnership. By contrast the opening of 2C announces (at least in strong mode) the possession by one player of the equivalent of more than half the deck (in HCP if bal, and a lot more in playing strength if unbal).

It is much easier to place cards and slot covers for losers when you are looking at the great majority of the cards than otherwise where you have to guess to a ridiculous degree (opener should be able to ask about key Q & J. where it will totally problematic for responder as which additional lesser Honours will be held in side suits - or need to be held).

While disagreeing on methods, I stillecho both mikeh & Frances that the key even after showing controls is for responder to recognise the additional values held (above the minimum for your control bid), and when agreeing a suit show them via splinters or 4NT bal raise of 3M as expressing extras in order to allow opener to move to slam/grand slam.

regards

[Stephen Tu]

I prefer 2h = pos (good 7, 8+ pts w/ 2+ controls), 2d = neg (w/ optional ch.min 2nd neg), 2S/2NT showing S/H or H/S if you prefer.

This puts an upper limit on 2d, so avoids some awkward auctions when responder bids 2d then later tries to catch up after opener's game signoff. So one can bid strongly after 2d without opener getting too excited, or one can make positive noise then back off if the hands don't fit well, without feeling that you have undisclosed values.

I also dislike too strong suit quality requirements for positive suit responses; I just feel that it's too rare to have 2/3 top honors, more often you have 1 top honor & 2c opener is looking at 3+ with the other two.

[han]

I also like to play Kokish in combination with 2D as showing some values. Although I won't deny that there are losses, one can deal with some of the losses (not all) by choosing some hands where responder may choose not to bid 2S. For example, you could agree that responder does not bid 2S with a minimum 5-5 hand with spades. (Minimum should perhaps mean at most a king and a queen.)

Does anybody have agreements like this? Or do you always bid 2S to allow opener to describe her hand?

[Impact]

Hannie,

I would go further and require that a bid of 2S is automatic ON ANY HAND WHICH DOES NOT hold 5+S.

There is a surfeit of alternative bids which will describe the hand starrting with the assumption that to bid NT you must be LESS likely to want to play NT,

so simply :-
2NT= 6+S (preferably having already denied a suit as good as QJ)
3C= 5S, <3H, at least 4+ in m
3D= 5S, <3H, no 2nd suit headed by top Honour (?)
3H= 3H & 5S
3S= 4H & 5S
3NT= 5H & 5S
4C= 6H & 5S
An alternative more involved scheme also excludes hands with as many as 4S:-

2NT= 6+S
3C= 4S (now whether you play a relay for other information or natural is dependent on predilection)
3D= 5S, <3H
3H= 3H & 5S
3S= 4H & 5S
3NT= 5H & 5S
4C= 6H & 5S

THere are a lot of variations on the theme, butthey also have advantages in terms of avoiding description to defender's of opener's strong hand while preserving the maximum prospect of opener declaring the hand whether he is balanced or not.

regards,