[gwnn]

I play the following NT defense with a few people (vs strong NT especially)

2♣=majors (should be 5-4)
2♦=one major, weakish
2M=this major, a sound opening hand
(2N=minors, etc)

should 2♦ be the better hand or 2M?

[655321]

I know it isn't what you asked, but ...

Wouldn't you lose a lot more by having to pass with all your 5M/4+m hands than you gain by having a more defined range for your 6M hands?

[suokko]

655321, on Dec 9 2009, 04:27 AM, said:

I know it isn't what you asked, but ...

Wouldn't you lose a lot more by having to pass with all your 5M/4+m hands than you gain by having a more defined range for your 6M hands?

None is going to pass with that hand type. You just bid 2M that doesn't deny side suit (even tough doesn't promise either)

Problem is 4M/5+m hands which don't have good bid I have played so that 2♦ is normal overcall strength and 2M is showing major minor canape.

[gwnn]

yes 655 that is entirely possible. it hasn't come up so often yet, it's just that some people here swear by it and it looks like a cool bid (of course the two are correlated).

[655321]

Ah OK, I misunderstood, and thought that 2♦ showed a 6 card Major.

[Jlall]

haha, rogerclee calls this "jlall vs NT" (I'm sure I didn't invent it, but it's what I strong prefer to play) but I use it specifically against weak NT not strong NT... Why would you use it only vs strong? The point is to be able to overcall 2M in two ways so that your game bidding is more accurate but you lose accuracy in partials (you don't find minor fits as well as if one showed a major and one showed M+m). Gaining accuracy in game bidding vs losing accuracy in partials seems good against weak NT but bad against strong NT.

[gwnn]

good point. the part in the brackets just reflected that usually we just discuss strong NT defense because almost nobody plays weak NT here (about the same % as US I would say).

[gnasher]

2♦ should be the weaker hand.

The 2♦ overcall is vulnerable to competition by LHO. If it goes
  1NT (2♦) 2NT 3♣ [non-forcing]
and you have a hand that wants to compete opposite one major but not opposite the other, you have a problem. You're more likely to want to do that opposite the stronger hand, so the weaker hand should be the one that bids the ambiguous 2♦.

[helene_t]

Agree with Justin. I think if nobody plays weak NT you shouldn't be playing this.

If playing against weak NT I don't think it matters much but I have a slight preference for 2♦ being weak. For the reason Gnasher says, but also partner is more likely to want to pass 2♦ if it shows a weak hand. Finally, the more accurate descriptions after 2M-2NT vis-a-vis 2♦-2NT are more needed if overcaller is strong (well, responder is more likely making a constructive inquiry if opener is strong.

So there are several arguments for letting 2♦ be weak, I think that together they trump the argument that you want to use the more obstructive 2M overcall when the board belongs to opps.

[Fluffy]

There surelly are some strong variants that go through 2♦ (good 2 suiters or good 1 suiters that don't wanna double for some reason). You better have 2♦ to be weak or very strong/shapy than strong or very strong then so you can double later to show the strong hand

[gwnn]

sorry Fluffy, no strong options

[Phil]

This is very similar to the openers consisting of a mini-multi 2♦/ sound weak 2's that many people play. I could even see using 2♦ as a weak, or a very strong 2M call, if pard isn't allowed to pass 2♦ (which seems dubious for constructive, as well as tactical bidding).

A lot of multi players that use Muideberg argue similarly; that 2M is better used to show a major + minor two suiter.

Justin, what do you use a (weak NT) - 3M as? I've always played it as a intermediate to strong jump overcall, which would reduce the need to split the ranges into 2M and 2♦.

[jdonn]

I've never played it but gosh, we already can't show a minor on the 2 level playing 2♣ and 2♦ these ways in something like woolsey, but now we can't show major and minor either? And we don't have the major + minor double either since it's a weak notrump! I hate to sound old fashioned but do minor suits not exist?

Anyway it would be clear to me 2♦ should be the weaker hand. The more vague bid should be made when the hand belongs to the opponents since it's damaging to them not to know our suit.

[aguahombre]

Please somebody explain how 2D can be used to show an unknown major in ACBL.

The GCC states that direct calls over 1NT other than double, or 2C, must have at least one known suit. The wording seems to apply to one-suiters as well as to two-suiters.

[helene_t]

Lol, who cares about GCC? Some of us don't play in ACBL (let alone GCC) events.

[jdonn]

aguahombre, on Dec 9 2009, 12:32 PM, said:

Please somebody explain how 2D can be used to show an unknown major in ACBL.

The GCC states that direct calls over 1NT other than double, or 2C, must have at least one known suit. The wording seems to apply to one-suiters as well as to two-suiters.

It can't in GCC events (except for specific geographic regions that make exceptions to allow it). That is well known. It is allowed in midchart events.

I played that throughout San Diego, announcing it before the round. At one table the opponents asked if we needed to have a written defense, and when I said no had a long discussion about what to play over it (with my help). At the very next table the opponents asked why in the world we would prealert such a simple convention. The lesson as always, you can never make anyone happy.

[jdonn]

helene_t, on Dec 9 2009, 12:58 PM, said:

Lol, who cares about GCC? Some of us don't play in ACBL (let alone GCC) events.

Naturally when a Hungarian asked, we were to assume he meant his question to pertain to small American tournaments. Obviously.

[aguahombre]

tks for the clarification, Josh. Now I know I can use that, or CRASH I guess, in Mid chart events.

And now I know that the OP is Hungarian.

[gwnn]

ethnic Hungarian born in Romania and currently living in Iceland - legality is not very much of an issue for me, I see HUM's sometimes in the club, no one raises an eyebrow.

[blackshoe]

Some here, including the OP, don't necessarily play under ACBL rules. Some do. Those who do presumably do care whether they can play this under the GCC, since that's the most prevalent chart in NA.

I agree with Aqua, the 2♦ overcall showing an unknown major is not legal under the GCC.