[inquiry]

If you are a typical north american bridge player, who has just started playing on line, you may hear the bidding start with an opening 2D bid, which the opponents alert, politely, as "multi".

So what do they mean, when they say multi? The answer is that they play the bid can have multiple meanings. In its simplist form, it shows a weak two in one of the majors. The responder doesn't know what the suit is. If he would pass a weak two by his partner, he simply bids 2H. If his partner suit is hearts, he will pass and they might play 2H that on 2D-P-2H-P-P-P, while if you held the hand with 2D, you might have opened 2H and the auction could have gone 2H-P-P-P. The 2H bid in response to 2D is usually alerted as PASS/CORRECT. This is because if openers suit is spades instead of hearts, when the two heart bid comes back to him, he will correct the bid to 2S.

Many players add additional hand types to the 2D bid, overloading its meanings. These additional possible hand include, big balanced hands (generally 20-21 or 23-24), a strong three suited hand, an acol two bid in either minor (not a major as that can become confusing in competitive auctions).

Other responses they will use when their partner bids 2D is leaps to 3H as a preemptive pass/correct. Opener either passes of bids 3S. And generally 2NT response is an asking bid to find out what type of hand the opener has (if multiple types are possible) or what the anchor suit if only major weak two is possible as well as if the hand is minimum or maximum.

Now that we know what multi-2D opening bid means (most defineately, not diamonds). It is time to decide how best to deal with this bid when your opponents spring it on you. In this thread, we should discuss possible defense bids and give example hands. I will help with this task if anyone is interested. I happen to like the defense Dr. Chris Rydall list on his webpage, but we probably should disscuss all the options.

Ben

[Free]

In my region, allmost everybody plays multi-2D (because 2M is mostly Muiderberg), and that in many forms, so we all have our defenses against that. What I play is the following thing:

2D - ?

Dbl = penalties: real D (since 2D isn't natural), partner may support if opponents bid
2M = normal bid of a major, good 5-card or 6+M
2NT = 18-22 semi-balanced
3C+ = like we opened 2NT
3X = pre-emptive
Pass = waiting bid (because the bidding doesn't end), can be strong or weak

Normally your LHO answers 2M (P/C) or 2NT (Forcing). After the p/c, we bid like a normal weak-2 opening:
After
2D - pass - 2H - pass
2S - ?
and
2D - pass - 2H - pass
pass - ?
and
2D - pass - 2S - pass
pass - ?

Dbl = opening strength (followed by a bidding scheme according to good-bad-2NT), like you would've doubled if opponents opened 2M

In that case (you passed the first time), if opponent has a strong version, you haven't told your strength if you have some, they are in a normal contract, and you won't get doubled heavily.

If they bid 2NT-forcing (2D - pass - 2NT - pass - ?), then normally the opener will answer 3X = weak-2 and a difference in strength (example C and D are min. weak in H and S, 3M is max. weak-2M). Bid like you feel...

I hope I helped you with this answer.


Free

[the hog]

Now that we know what multi-2D opening bid means most definitely, not diamonds.

This is not strictly correct Ben.

Versions I have come across are:

1) Weak in M, 20-22, strong 4441

2) Any combination of above

3) Weak in M, or 18-22 with strong Ds and a secondary 4 card H or C suit

4) Mini multi - just weak 2 in a Major

Version 3 is used by some top Polish players and described by Matula in his book on the Polish Club. It is used as these hand types represent difficulties in PC.

An effective defence to the Multi is:

   x=13-15 bal or 19+, natural bidding
   2h,2s,3c,3d=natural
   2nt=16-18 bal, sys on
   3h,3s=natural, good suit, good playing hand
   3nt=to play, w/ trick taking hand
   4c,4d=this suit plus a major, - Leaping Michaels - 4d/4c=bid major; 4h/4d=pass or correct
   4h,4s=natural
   4nt=both minors
   pass, then x=takeout

   over 2d-(p)-any M
      any new suit natural
      x=takeout
      jump to 4c,4d=5-5
      4nt=both m’s, unless it’s over 4s, then 4nt=any two suits

Free's defence is FAR from optimal. Why?

a) The 18-22 range is far too wide to be effective. 5 point ranges are just unwiedly. What do you do with a decent 5 count here and no way to investigate, bid to an unmakeable 3N when overcaller has the bottom of his range?

The X of 2D to show Ds is too restrictive.

c) As the opener is likely to have a weak 2 in a M most often, to play 3X as pre emptive is an inefficient concept. (Don't pre empt a pre empt). Far better is to play it as a 9 playing trick hand.

Having played many versions of the 2D Multi, the most effective one appears to be Weak 2 in a M only. Far from Free's assertion, the bidding can and does occasionally end, so overcallers are forced into immediate action or the hand can be passed out.

Incidentally even with the possibility of holding the strong version, there are cases in championship play where responder has passed the 2D bid, holding say:

x
Axx
KQTxxx
KJx

Some of these cases have been more succesful than others, as you would expect.

Chris Ryall proposes an interesting defence which, no doubt, Ben will describe. We looked at and briefly tried this, but our major objection to this was the potential wrong siding of NT contracts.

[luis]

I've played a combination of multi-2d and muirderberg for a long time with one of my pds. The best thing about the 2d opening is that you can open 2h/2s with 5 cards. Multi itself is not great but the 2h/2s openings on 5 cards have always produced good results for us.

I agree with the defense suggested by Ron, doubling 2d with diammonds is too restrictive. If you have 13-15 HCP even balanced you must enter the auction or maybe it will be too late after a 4h (p/c) bid gets back to you, pd may not act unilaterally over a 3 or 4 level bid and you will miss a game.

Besides Ron's suggested defense Dixon's work well too but it's less natural, if you can make your pd learn Dixon fine if not just use the std Natural def suggested by Ron. Free's defense while it may work for him looks inferior to , please understand that this is just my opinion.

Finally about how multi 2d should be I think that a weak 2 in a major ONLY is best because the bid is then not-forcing and your opponent can pass to see what happens because the auction may well end in 2d.
Playing this variant there're some interesting gizmos available when you are not vulnerable like passing 2d without diamonds or when pd bids 2 or 3h p/c passing with spades.... With my pd when NV vrs VUL we used to alert a pass of a p/c bid as "might just have the other suit!", of course we did that only from time to time........

[hotShot]

Multi around here usualy shows:

1) a weak 2 Hand (6+)in a Major or
2) a semiforcing in a minor or
3) a balanced hand 20+ up to 25+ depending on rest of the system

usually the ansers are:
2H weak
2S inviting in H pass if U have S
2NT forcing, othen artifical aswers for better see the weak hand

3H usually shows inviting hand both Majors

If open bids a nimor it was semiforcing there

[inquiry]

For Beginners and Intermediates, it is clear that The Hog and Luis provided the best advice for how to deal with the multi-2D opening bid. Ron (the hog) gave a very nice defense and description of how to play it. Luis referred to a very good defense to consider (Dixon).

The major difference between these two is the bid of 2H or 2S over your opponents 2D opening bid. In Ron's (the hog) method, this is natural, showng the suit bid. In Dixon, referred to by Luis, a bid of 2H or 2S is a "takeout double" of the unbid major. That is, the 2H or 2S bidder might have a good three card suit or four card suit in the suit bid. Responder bids as if in response to a takeout double. Either of these methods work, discuss them with your partner.

Ron then predicted that I would describe the multi-over-multi method from Chris Rydall's page. I will not for two reasons. First, this post is meant for beginners/intermediate players. You have to know how to play multi-2D to play multi-verus-multi defense. The second reason I will not describe this method is that I couldn't do as good a job as Chris did. Anyone interested can go read his description of this very fun defense on his webpage at:
http://www.cavendish...ge/mult-v-m.htm

I will say that I have played this method and find it very effective. Maybe not quite as uniformly good results as Chris suggest, but I have been more happy with this than with Dixon.

Ben