[Free]

A Mexican 2♦ opening shows 18-19HCP balanced. Question is: do you include 5 card Majors, do you only allow 1 of the Majors, or none? Please explain why or why not.

Advantages of this opening is clear: 1m-1M-2NT is now free to show some kind of support. What about 1♥-1♠-2NT, do you want to use this bid to show strong support, or do you better use Gazzilli in this case?

[blackshoe]

First, that ain't the way I learned Mexican 2♦.

Aside from that, your post makes me wonder about the context of this bid. What's the rest of the NT ladder look like? And what the hell is Gazzilli?

I suppose the actual range doesn't matter much. I'd use Romex Stayman, or at least some version of Puppet Stayman, over the opening. That''ll cater to the 5 card major.

[Gerben42]

I think 5♥-only is best if you really want to play this convention.

[Free]

The rest of the NT ladder is quite standard:
12-14- = 1X
14+-17 = 1NT
18-19 = 2♦
20-21 = 2NT
22+ = 2♣

[mike777]

Free, on Jun 10 2007, 06:12 AM, said:

A Mexican 2♦ opening shows 18-19HCP balanced.  Question is: do you include 5 card Majors, do you only allow 1 of the Majors, or none?  Please explain why or why not.

Advantages of this opening is clear: 1m-1M-2NT is now free to show some kind of support.  What about 1♥-1♠-2NT, do you want to use this bid to show strong support, or do you better use Gazzilli in this case?

Yes, I play it with a 5 card major, offshape often. I basically try and throw as many 18-19 hcp hands without a stiff or a void or 5 major/4minor combo into 2D as possible. I try and avoid opening 2D with a 5 card major and a side xx suit. That is 2 flaws, one too many.

The reason is not because 2D is such a great convention but to make my one level bids more constructive since we open on such crappy hands.

I just use the jump to 2nt by opener 1x=1y=2nt as 17 hcp balanced...1nt=14-16.

The other option is to make 2d=17-19 and use the 2nt jump rebid for something else.

[blackshoe]

Try this:

12-16 open 1 of a suit, rebid 1NT
17-18 open 1 of a suit, rebid 2NT
19-20 open 1NT (artificial, also includes hands just too weak for a GF), rebid 2NT
21-22 open 2♦ rebid 2NT
23-24 open 2♣ rebid 2NT
25-26 open 2NT (natural, forcing)
27-28 open 2♦ jump in NT
29-30 open 2NT, rebid 4NT

2♦ can include game forcing hands with a primary diamond suit, one or two suited. Now an auction like 2♦-2♠-3♣ shows a diamond two suiter (3♦ asks for the second suit). 2♦-2♥-3♦ shows a diamond one suiter. Similarly, 2♣-2♦-3♣ shows a club two suiter, and 2♣-2♦-3♦ shows a club one suiter.

[keylime]

When I played it, I allowed weak five card majors and played a transfer and fit bid as responses.

I think the best component to this bid is the 1x-1y-2nt rebid and likewise the 3x rebid; I play this as fit denying and showing, respectively.

[Gerben42]

My preferred method in standard is NOT to use this but instead open all big NT with 1♣, rebidding 2♦ showing either natural reverse or the big bal. hand.

[jtfanclub]

blackshoe, on Jun 10 2007, 02:10 PM, said:

17-18 open 1 of a suit, rebid 2NT

[rant]

I don't get you Standard American guys, I really don't.

Used to be, that Mexican was 19-21 and 2NT was 22-23.

Somehow, these values have magically dropped, so that Mexican is 18-19 and 2NT is 20-21.

Now, the recomendation is to open 1 of a suit and rebid 2NT with a mighty 17, even though partner might have 5, or 3, or in a few cases 0.

It can't be that bidding has become more accurate over the years because, well, 2NT is 2NT. Nor do I think that it's the wonder of bidding games red in IMPs, because nobody has said that such-and-such is an IMP only bid, or red only.

So what's happened here? Has declarer play improved that much, while defensive play has dropped down to nothing? Or are people just crazy?

Cripes, in Precision I play 1♣-1♦-1NT as 16 to a really rotten 20. Why? Because, well, I really don't enjoy being at 2NT with 19 across 4, let alone 17 across 3.

But this must be poor play on my part, because God knows everybody else seems to enjoy it, even when they've also gotten the info that they're looking at a probable misfit.
[/rant]

As far as Mexican goes, if 2♦-2♥ is passable (0-4 hcp, no suit, says nothing about hearts) then sure, I don't see why you shouldn't bid 2♦ with a 5 card major. If 2♥ is a transfer to spades, then I would think bidding 1 of a major would make more sense.

[mike777]

no one plays 2d=2h as natural and passable...good God!

to repeat ...2D is not a cosmic convention..the goal is to make your one level opening bids more constructive.
I open one d on:
KJx..QJx..KTxxxxx..void

not


Axx..Axx...AKxx...Axx
Yes you can cite danger hands.

[blackshoe]

The standard american NT ladder is screwed up becaused people don't or didn't understand the difference between point count requirements for balanced and unbalanced hands and because SA has way to wide a range on the opening one of a suit bid. People have been trying to fix that last problem by moving the bar where 2♣ starts for unbalanced hands, and dragging the NT ladder down along with it.

[mike777]

blackshoe, on Jun 11 2007, 02:08 AM, said:

The standard american NT ladder is screwed up becaused people don't or didn't understand the difference between point count requirements for balanced and unbalanced hands and because SA has way to wide a range on the opening one of a suit bid. People have been trying to fix that last problem by moving the bar where 2♣ starts for unbalanced hands, and dragging the NT ladder down along with it.

I really object to comments on sayc such at this.

Sayc in one form or another has been around for 60 years or more.

If we do not know how to bid a system after 60 years or its improvements it is not our(non expert) fault.
1) I continue to believe we lose because of how we play the cards not the system
2) after 60 years or so....the most common problems should be well known with a fix or revised improvement..

[Free]

jtfanclub, on Jun 11 2007, 06:11 AM, said:

blackshoe, on Jun 10 2007, 02:10 PM, said:

17-18 open 1 of a suit, rebid 2NT

[rant]

I don't get you Standard American guys, I really don't.

~snip~
[/rant]

I'm European...

[whereagles]

If you allow 5 card majors into the mexican, note that what by your table is

2♦ 2NT
pass

might very well become

1M pass

at the other table. Anyway, just something to think about, in case this bothers you.

[jtfanclub]

mike777, on Jun 11 2007, 01:50 AM, said:

no one plays 2d=2h as natural and passable...good God!

Then it's a good thing nobody suggested that, huh?

To repeat myself, one method is that 2♥ is 0-4 and no suit. This lets you stop at 2M if you open Mexican with a 5 card major and partner has nothing.

If you really need me to Google for sources, I suppose I can. But that is the original definition of the 2♥ bid in 'bid to win, play for pleasure', which invented the Mexican 2♦.

[blackshoe]

mike777, on Jun 11 2007, 02:12 AM, said:

I really object to comments on sayc such at this.

I didn't say SAYC, I sais "Standard American". That said, SAYC is a form of SA, so yeah, my post applies to it.

Sixty years ago, the SA NT ladder looked like this:

13-15 rebid 1NT
16-18 open 1NT
19-20 rebid 2NT
21-23 open 2NT
24-26 open 3NT

Higher bids were ill-defined, but they're rare anyway.

Then the artificial 2♣ came along, and we got

21-22 open 2NT
23-24 open 2♣, rebid 2NT
25-26 open 2♣, rebid 3NT

Then people started opening lighter, and the response to that was to push the range of each of these steps down by one point, and extend it to three points for the 2♣ and rebid hands. The latter in spite of the fact that there is good reason to limit the range to 2 points. So object all you like. Doesn't change anything.

I never said that it was anybody's fault this is so, but if anyone is to blame it is the experts from whom we get most of our system. There are, otoh, quite a few of what I call "lemming bids" - bids that people use because "everybody" uses them, that are not necessarily the best.

The goal of any player (at matchpoints at least) is to get to the par contract - the one that in theory everyone else will be in - and beat the others by playing better. If everyone is using the same system, even if it's flawed, most everyone will get to the same contract. So yeah, the winning is in the play. So what?

People can come up with lots of reasons not to change something. Usually they boil down to "I don't want to make the effort".

[blackshoe]

Whereagles: if that's addressed to me, I don't think I specified the meaning of responses to 2♦. Neither did the OP, AFAIR. I would think 2NT would be forcing. You might still get to 3NT from the wrong side, sure.

Over the past nearly 20 years or so, George Rosenkranz has written four books on the Romex system. Mexican 2♦ is a keystone of that system - although not in the form of the OP. It shows 21-22 or 27-28 balanced, or GF with primary diamonds. In *each* of those four books, the responses to 2♦ have changed, attemptng to minimize departure from where "everyone else" will be and to avoid wrong siding the contract. I would think one could make the same attempts over a lower ranged balanced opening.

BTW, the weaker balanced hand type occurs roughly 85% of the time, the GF less than one percent. So the latest response structure caters to the 21-22 balanced hand.

[jtfanclub]

blackshoe, on Jun 11 2007, 09:42 AM, said:

-22 or 27-28 balanced, or GF with primary diamonds. In *each* of those four books, the responses to 2♦ have changed, attemptng to minimize departure from where "everyone else" will be and to avoid wrong siding the contract.

Which get uglier and uglier.

It's been a looong time since I played Mexican 2♦ (and even then it was 19-21), but if I did, and I played it as 18-19, I think I'd prefer:

2♥: No game interest, no suit. Opener can place the contract.
2♠: Relay to NT. Auctions include:
........2♦-2♠-2NT-3♣- Invitational- 6+ clubs with about 5 hcp, at least one honor (AKQ) in clubs, no honors (AKQ) outside of clubs.
........2♦-2♠-2NT-3♦, same, but in diamonds.
........2♦-2♠-2NT-3NT Balanced 12-13 count.
2NT: Relay to clubs Auctions include:
.......2♦-2NT-3♣-Pass, of course
.......2♦-2NT-3♣-3♦: Slam interest with a diamond suit.
.......2♦-2NT-3♣-3NT: Slam interest with a club suit.
3♣: Stayman
3♦: Transfer to hearts
3♥: Transfer to spades
3♠: Transfer to 3NT, balanced 5-11 count.
3NT: Forcing, asking for specific aces, I guess.

So what do most people play over it?

[blackshoe]

Actually, that response structure looks interesting.

I dunno about most people, but the current Romex structure is:

• Pass: a yarborough with a long diamond suit.
  
• 2H: 0-9 HCP, no slam interest opposite 21-22 balanced, < 4 hearts
  
• 2S: 10+ HCP, 3+ controls (usually), slam interest
  
• 2NT: transfer, 0-3 HCP, 6+ clubs, no 4 card major, or possibly a major two suiter
  
• 3C: special Stayman, at least 4-4 in the majors and only game interest.
  
• 3D: transfer, 0-9 HCP, exactly 5 hearts, < 4 spades.
  
• 3H: transfer, 0-3 HCP, 5+ spades, < 4 hearts, signoff
  
• 3S: balanced game only hand, exactly 4 hearts, < 4 spades
  
• 3NT: at least 5-5 in the majors, game interest only
  
• 4C: 6+ hearts, to play in 4 hearts
  
• 4D: 6+ spades, to play in 4 spades

[whereagles]

blackshoe, on Jun 11 2007, 02:42 PM, said:

Whereagles: if that's addressed to me (...)

Well, not really. I was just noting one thing that could happen if you allow 5CM into the mexican.