[pstansbu]

Played this the other night - duplicate MPs.

---

Playing Muiderberg / Woo 2s my 2♠ bid shows a weak hand with 5♠ and 4 of an unspecified minor. Partner said he didn't bid a 2NT enquiry as he thought I would have all my values in my bid suits and he had too many quick losers in ♥ and if I showed ♦ as my second suit, then 2 quick losers in ♣ - so he passed.

I can see a case both ways: I like the fact it's a very descriptive bid in terms of shape and strength as well as being pre-emptive and you're not really pre-empting partner as the 2NT enquiry provides a complete picture - on this basis use it often. Concentrating the strength makes it easier for partner to envisage hands - but this means limiting it's use.

Thoughts and suggestions please

[WellSpyder]

Yes, it's nice to have most of your values in your suits. But I don't understand partner's arguments at all. If you swap your ♥A with a low ♣, does that make the hand worse opposite his holding??

[Zelandakh]

As WellSpyder writes, values in the long suits are strongly preferred. The issue is not so much this one, where partner holds values, but that poor suits make it more difficult for us to barrage and put us on defence more often, where the opening provides a useful roadmap for declarer.

I also agree about the auction evaluation. Even such a basic Muiderberg hand as ♠QJTxx ♥x ♦KQxx ♣xxx will usually make game. I would assume your partner regards that as a solid 2♠ opening regardless of their minimum standards.

[ahydra]

Sorry but your partner is a big, big wimp. 17 HCPs opposite ~5-9, including four spades to the AK plus useful honours in whichever minor you happen to have, is worth bidding game direct (or susrely at least an invite). Who cares about 2 quick losers in hearts if you have 11 quick winners in the other suits?

ahydra

[pstansbu]

By way of clarification - I think I'm really asking about the minor suit values. I'd always want the Major to look a bit like this one - 1 card short of a fairly traditional weak 2. But interested if anyone feels this too conservative

[Wouterf]

Muiderberg and other 2suited preempts are basically like any other weak two bid. Points in your long suits are very strongly prefered but never having anything outside lowers the frequency way to much. It is simply a matter of counting positive aspects (singleton, hcp in long suit, no aces etc) to the negative ones (5422 shape, point outside long suits, aces etc)

When it comes to Muiderberg it is esspecially important that your M suit is good, since partner will very often pass 2♠ with say a 2434 12count. You will therefore play the 5-2fit very often.

As for your p, his argument has some merit but his bidding is still way to pessimistic, why should p always have a 5422 shape? something like QJxxx-x-K10xx-xxx already makes a very decent game.

[FelicityR]

It all depends how weak the weak 2 level bid is, and whether a 2NT relay is unconditionally forcing to game. Even if 4♠ is not the right contract, 3NT by East might be.

East passing with such a good hand just seems wrong to me. If East was the opening bidder and had opened 1NT, and West had bid 2♥ transfer, East would have super-accepted with 3♠.

[xavierf]

Maybe 3♦ is an invite for 4M is possible?

[xavierf]

double posts..

This post has been edited by xavierf: 2017-April-06, 05:26

[xavierf]

double post

This post has been edited by xavierf: 2017-April-06, 05:26

[xavierf]

double post

[pstansbu]

Wouterf, on 2017-April-06, 02:13, said:

When it comes to Muiderberg it is especially important that your M suit is good, since partner will very often pass 2♠ with say a 2434 12count. You will therefore play the 5-2fit very often.

Agreed and this helps distil my thinking - the more often you can describe this shape the better, but expect partner to pass often.