[aguahombre]

The opponents use an opening 2NT to show the minors. My goal is to learn a good defense, not to propose one to poke holes in which. Questions:

Does their/our vulnerability matter? If so, how should the methods change?

What should direct bids or a double show or start?

Assuming the auction will get back to you, what should pass followed by a later call
show?

What are 4th Chair actions after a pass and a bid?

Have these question been asked and answered in another string?

Etc.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

A possibility is to use a similar defence as against a multi 2D, combined with unusual vs. unusual.

We play

X is either 12-14 bal. or +18, if you have 15-17 bal., you have to pass first,
that is basically the 2D multi part (Dixon double)

3C - good hand with hearts
3D - good hand with spades
3H - 10-14
3S - 10-14

Not sure how good it works in practice, since we dont encounter 2NT for the
minors too often, but we have an agreement, which reuses certain agreements,
so at least accidents due to memory lapses are low.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Cascade]

P_Marlowe, on Jul 31 2009, 05:20 AM, said:

Hi,

A possibility is to use a similar defence as against a multi 2D, combined with unusual vs. unusual.

We play

X is either 12-14 bal. or +18, if you have 15-17 bal., you have to pass first,
that is basically the 2D multi part (Dixon double)

3C - good hand with hearts
3D - good hand with spades
3H - 10-14
3S - 10-14

Not sure how good it works in practice, since we dont encounter 2NT for the
minors too often, but we have an agreement, which reuses certain agreements,
so at least accidents due to memory lapses are low.

With kind regards
Marlowe

Over 2NT I wouldn't like to force to the three-level with balanced 12 counts. So this part would need to be modified. Granted they will often bid 3minor but when they can XX we know we are in big trouble.

[skjaeran]

Usually plays:
x=strong balanced
3m=t/o with longer/stronger corresponding M
3M=natural
4m=55+M, 4♣ stronger than 4♦

[aguahombre]

skaeran, on Jul 30 2009, 01:51 PM, said:

Usually plays:
x=strong balanced
3m=t/o with longer/stronger corresponding M
3M=natural
4m=55+M, 4♣ stronger than 4♦

Sounds good. How about some suggestions for 4th chair after a minor has been selected? Also, I understand that pass originally and then coming back in must have some meaning, although dangerous because the opps might not have a real fit.

[gwnn]

I don't know about that.

What if it comes back 5♣-p-p-?

[the hog]

I play:
3C = 5+H and 4S
3D = 5+S and 4H
3M = s/s
4C = 5/5 strong. Now 4D asks
4D = 5/5 not as good as 4C

[dake50]

Meta-agree slam tries are ON. Just best guess M-game. 2NT preempt MAY scramble us into 4M, never into bad 6M.
I like X->C-A,KQ fragment; 3C ->D-frag; 3D ->H and 3H ->S with cue m-short next if 3M accepted. Mild slam interest if partner cooperates.
This frees 4m/4M for clear slam tries: immediate 4m m-single/void and slammy H. 4M slammy with C-control, missing D-control.
Slammy S starts 3S hoping m-cue.
5-5MM xfers one bids 2nd.

[guido]

The approach I have used in several partnerships:

X: bal/semi-bal. dual range. (something like 12-15 hcp or 19+ hcp)
pass then double: bal/semi-bal (something like 16-18)
3C: majors with better/longer Hearts
3D: majors with better/longer Spades
3H/3S: natural
3N: to play (e.g., Kx-AKQJxxx--Kx-Ax)
4m: void with majors
4M: natural


After (2N) - P - (3C):
3D: majors
3M/3N/4M: natural
X: strong NTish
4m: void with majors

After (2N) - P - (3D)
as above except double is majors

After (2N) - P - (3M/3N/4M)
X: penalty (anti-psyche)
others as expected

After (2N) - P - 4m
X: t/o


Note: The above is, I think, reasonable, if not ideal. However, it is part of our meta-agreements on handling the opponents' two-suiter calls. We prefer to know how we handle all such calls rather than design methods for each specific curcumstance.