[david_c]

hrothgar, on Aug 1 2006, 06:05 PM, said:

I ran a quick sim with the conditions that you asked
Not sure how useful the information is, but...

the frequency of the weak two bid is .0008303
the frequency of the five_four pattern is .0186137

I suspect that the conditions that you set for a weak two bid (two out of the top three honors and and less than seven HCP) really torpedo the frequency.  Standard weak twos are pretty rare, but not this rare.

Eek, I think you have the definition wrong - 5-card suits were allowed if they had two top honours, and 6-card suits were allowed without any such restriction.

I believe a standard weak two has a frequency of a little over 1%.

[FrancesHinden]

hrothgar, on Aug 1 2006, 06:05 PM, said:

I ran a quick sim with the conditions that you asked
Not sure how useful the information is, but...

the frequency of the weak two bid is .0008303
the frequency of the five_four pattern is .0186137

I suspect that the conditions that you set for a weak two bid (two out of the top three honors and and less than seven HCP) really torpedo the frequency. Standard weak twos are pretty rare, but not this rare.

I read the description as 2-7 HCP and either (a 6-card suit), or (a 5-card suit with 2 of the top 3).

[hrothgar]

Oops

sorry about that. Here is a revised sim...

Weak_two = .006981
five_four = .0185584

(Must admit it was particularly galling to have made this mistake after the precision 2♣ alert thread the other day)

[Al_U_Card]

hrothgar, on Aug 2 2006, 07:14 AM, said:

Oops

sorry about that.  Here is a revised sim...

Weak_two = .006981
five_four = .0185584

(Must admit it was particularly galling to have made this mistake after the precision 2♣ alert thread the other day)

Richard, could you tell me the frequency of a 6 card D suit (5-10 hcp) versus 4D and 5C with 11-16 hcp)? (If its not too much trouble?) Thanks

[whereagles]

Use 5 cards weak twos. Preempts should be bid naturally because it offers opps less chances to butt-in. In other words, it puts more pressure on them, which is what preempts are all about.

If possible, let 2♣ opening go natural, weak, as well.

[mycroft]

If I'm allowed ACBL Mid-Chart, I play:

mini-multi, usually very aggressive;
2H majors, 5-4 minimum (if I have to play pairs, I don't do this - 5-5 just doesn't come up enough)
2S good preempt in a minor (encouraging 3NT).

If playing Precision, I replace 2H with the Precision 2D - 3415, 4315, 4414, 4405. I note that the defence to that in the Database is 2+ boards, and half a page, despite the fact that partner can (and probably will) pass a (potential) 4315 with a 2263 2-count...

If not playing ACBL, 2H can be 4-4, of course.

Finally - as an EHAA proponent, I like whereagles' suggestion!

Michael.

[joshs]

I have experimented with lots of schemes here in conjunction with 2D multi:
a. 2M=5M, 4+m
b. 2H=Weak with both majors, 2S=Weak with both Minors
c. 2H=Weak with both majors, 2S=Intermediate
d. 2H=Flannary, 2S=Intermediate
e. (My Strong Preference) 2M=Intermediate (9-12 ish)

While e doesn't appear to fill a hole (e.g. it doesn't enable you to bid any new hand types) you gain in the following ways:
1. Hands of average strength are very common and you are very well placed. The opps might have to make a dangerous 3 level overcall or get shut out. The auction also tempos well, I have won many imps on the auction 2H-(2S)-3H(on a doubleton)-(3S)
Its hard not to raise to 3S with 3 card support.
2. You gain a lot of bidding accuracy on your major 1 suiters, e.g.
multi 2D=5-8ish
2M=9-12ish
1M then 2M=13-15
1M then 3M=16-18

These tighter ranges make bidding these hands easier.
Also often the auction can go
1M-1N(Forcing)-2M-4M when responder merely has a good fitting balanced 10-11 count

So what you give up in not being able to open certain hands, you gain in getting great results on a frequent hand type.

Having played the M+m pre-empts for years, I still like them (with some suit quality restrictions) at least when white, but they are very high variance bids.

I have never played the less frequent 5M+5m version, which is somewhat safer, but only somewhat.

I am kind of curious about playing 2M as 4 in M, and 6 in a minor with reasonable strength, say 8-11. I don't think it will happen much, but it seems like an interesting idea at least when white. Since 4-3 fits will not play well on this hand type, I think its too dangerous red.

[awm]

Well I don't have much experience playing most of these methods, but I have a fair amount playing against them.

My general experience has been that five-card weak twos win some hands and lose some hands. While I can think of a few times when I've been "fixed" by opponents opening a weak two on a five card suit I can also think of many times when the five-card weak two ended up backfiring. My own experience opening weak twos on five-card suits have been similar. I don't see all that much difference in effectiveness between the "5-4 preempt" and a five-card weak two -- it's relatively rare that you have a better spot in the four-card minor and even when you do it may be hard to find (say responder is 1453 and opener bids 2♠; are you going to look for the minor and risk the three level on a 4-3 fit, or just take your lumps in 2♠ undoubled?). While I'm sure this opening wins its share of boards, it also loses its share.

On the other hand, my experiences playing against the 5-5 preempts have been uniformly bad. I recall losing an IMP league match because my opponents opened two of these (one at each table) and obtained a huge positive swing for their side on each. In fact I can't recall a single board where my opponents have opened a 5-5 preempt and received a below-average result, and I can think of many where it's won them the board...

Of course I've also won a few boards with my weak two in diamonds, and there are frequency considerations to account for. But these 5-5 preempts seem to be a consistent winner when they come up and I can't say the same for really any other treatment I've seen.

[hrothgar]

I did a fair amount of experimentation with highly undisciplined weak 2M openings...

I tried a number of different methods (Acol style preempts, the MOSCITO openings that Paul Martson prefers, a bunch of other stuff). I came to the conclusion that I really dislike undiciplined 2M openings. In particular, I hate methods that include 5332 hand patterns. Maybe my judgement wasn't good enough, but I never felt well positioned after a 2M opening.

From my perspective, I'm happy playing most anything, as long as its relatively disciplined. Part of the reason that i really like assumed fit methods its that its possible to have both a well disciplined opening and a high opening frequency...

[luke warm]

Free, on Aug 1 2006, 08:55 PM, said:

luke warm, on Aug 1 2006, 06:22 PM, said:

mgoetze, on Jul 31 2006, 08:44 PM, said:

I prefer to use some of the 2-level bids as (gasp) constructive bids.

so do i... all 2 bids for me are 5+ with 4+ clubs and 11-15... for a preempt i just bid at the next level via misiry xfers

eeew, transfer preempts. Why not just bid only strong hands, you'll be better off for sure! Either eliminate the preempts out of your misiry bids, or don't preempt in transfer...

why? what am i missing? 2nt=club preempt else 2 suiter, <5 losers, same color