[Wackojack]

I have noticed watching some of the viewgraph matches that some partnerships were reported to be playing 2 levels of weak 2 bids. Apparantly a multi 2♦ showing 1 level and 2♥/♠ another level. Does anyone know the whole structure?

[helene_t]

Sounds like "garbage multi", or is it something different?

[skjaeran]

There's several versions of this.

Most frequent is constructive weak 2 major openings and some kind of Weak (or Garbage) Multi, with or without strong alternative(s).

I've seen several dividing lines between the "strong" and weak version. Some play the constructive weak 2 as 6-10, some 8-11 and I've even seen 9-12. All these show a 6-bagger. The weaker version normally is weaker in hcp and/or shorter.

With one partner I play the Garbage Multi only non-vulnerable. We play 2M=8-11 and a 6-card suit (7-bagger occasionally) and 2♦ as a very weak hand (0-7 hcp and normally a 5-card major - we define the hand as too weak to invite game vs a 15-17NT) OR a 28-30NT. This means that we have hands that fall between 2♦ and 2M.

[jdonn]

skaeran, on Nov 3 2007, 08:07 AM, said:

With one partner I play the Garbage Multi only non-vulnerable. We play 2M=8-11 and a 6-card suit (7-bagger occasionally) and 2♦ as a very weak hand (0-7 hcp and normally a 5-card major - we define the hand as too weak to invite game vs a 15-17NT) OR a 28-30NT. This means that we have hands that fall between 2♦ and 2M.

Wouldn't you get a whole lot more mileage out of 2♦ by simply eliminating the 28-30 hand so partner can pass the 2♦ bid if he wants? Well I guess he still can if he has at least 13

[Edmunte1]

2♦ shows a ''bad'' weak 2 - usually up to 8 hcp
2♥/♠ shows a ''good'' weak 2 usually 9-12(13-)
The main advantage of this convention is that when you open 1M and repeat it, you show an average hand 13+-16-, decreasing the risk of missing a game.

[skjaeran]

jdonn, on Nov 3 2007, 06:37 PM, said:

skaeran, on Nov 3 2007, 08:07 AM, said:

With one partner I play the Garbage Multi only non-vulnerable. We play 2M=8-11 and a 6-card suit (7-bagger occasionally) and 2♦ as a very weak hand (0-7 hcp and normally a 5-card major - we define the hand as too weak to invite game vs a 15-17NT) OR a 28-30NT. This means that we have hands that fall between 2♦ and 2M.

Wouldn't you get a whole lot more mileage out of 2♦ by simply eliminating the 28-30 hand so partner can pass the 2♦ bid if he wants? Well I guess he still can if he has at least 13

Sure we could. But partner can still pass - how often do you think we have that 28-30 hand?
But I agree, it's a remnant from early Multi days where you had to have (a) strong version(s).

[nbailey]

Would it not be better to have the garbage ones open 2M rather than 2D, as opening 2D gives them more chances to double?

[skjaeran]

nbailey, on Nov 4 2007, 06:37 AM, said:

Would it not be better to have the garbage ones open 2M rather than 2D, as opening 2D gives them more chances to double?

Yeah, but the garbage 2♦ allows partner to pass with a ♦ suit, which he is far more apt to do vs the weak hand with a 5-card suit than vs the constructive hand with a 6-bagger. Btw, I can't remember having been doubled after the garbage 2♦. (I can remember opps doubling 2♦ several times, but not us declaring a doubled contract.)

It's more important for partner to know your suit when you have the constructive hand. It's easier to preempt when you know about the fit immideately and bidding constructively is also easier.

And besides, when you have a concealed 5-card suit it's more frequent that opps will bid "your" suit than if it's a 6-card suit. This has happened several times to me.

[whereagles]

I disagree with trash multi because it deprives you of one of the most bothersome openings out there: the weak 2♦. Unless you absolutely need the multi to put some strong variant there, forget trash multi.