[Rossoneri]

---

[Phil]

2♣.

Side question - what are people playing 2♣ - 2♦ - 3♥ for these days?

[pooltuna]

Phil, on Aug 3 2010, 04:56 PM, said:

2♣.

Side question - what are people playing 2♣ - 2♦ - 3♥ for these days?

♥ are trump so start qbidding

[quiddity]

I'd open 2C and hope to use some variety of Kokish to show hearts/spades.

[kenrexford]

FWIW, this is a good hand for the methods I suggest in my "New Frontiers" book. The auction would be really nice:

1. Open 2♦, promising 4+ spades. If Responder has 4+ spades, he will immediately set spades as trumps, often bidding 2NT to do this, and there will be tons of space for patterning, cuebidding, etc.

2. If partner declines spades (usually bidding 2♥), bid 3♥, showing exactly four spades (with 5♠/6♥ another call applies) and 5+ hearts. If partner has exactly two hearts, he bids 3♠. A heart fit, if it exists, will be found.

3. If partner makes the one difficult call (diamond positive), you still can bid 3♥, showing four spades and 5+ hearts.

[ONEferBRID]

kenrexford, on Aug 3 2010, 05:42 PM, said:

..... in my "New Frontiers" book....

"Where no man has gone before..."

Glad to see you back

[gwnn]

to the thinking b&w chimp: it's 4♥+5♦ strong but usually 6 diamonds

to the lord of the rings hobbit: do you have this written down somewhere properly? it really feels like a very cute system I'd like to learn it, I've seen you talk about it several times

[kenrexford]

gwnn, on Aug 3 2010, 07:07 PM, said:

to the lord of the rings hobbit: do you have this written down somewhere properly? it really feels like a very cute system I'd like to learn it, I've seen you talk about it several times

http://www.amazon.com/New-Frontiers-Strong...s/dp/1554947529

or

http://www.ebooksbridge.com/index.php?main...products_id=390

[hrothgar]

In general, I hate opening 2♣ strong when I have a two suiter.

This hand is the exception.
Too strong to consider 1♥

[Phil]

gwnn, on Aug 3 2010, 07:07 PM, said:

to the thinking b&w chimp: it's 4♥+5♦ strong but usually 6 diamonds

Duh. I knew that but spaced it out.

Looking at 4♠, 5+♥ I'm thinking we could use 3♥ for this, but it seems Kokish followed by 3♠ works just fine.

[peachy]

Phil, on Aug 3 2010, 04:56 PM, said:

2♣.

Side question - what are people playing 2♣ - 2♦ - 3♥ for these days?

I play that 2C-opener's jump to 3H says "hearts is trump, start cuebidding". If responder's first response was 2H [no ace/king], then responder cues a queen if he has one.

[JLOGIC]

Automatic 2C, this is an amazingly strong hand.

[Cascade]

Normal 2♣

[aguahombre]

Yeh, 2C. But not going to take over with 3H, just rebid 2H. Context: 2D waiting, not sophisticated to know Kokish. Might get to show the spades, later. I know you all have great systems, but just in case there is anyone out there interested in non-fancy.

Hope I was allowed by Csaba to post a non-optimal answer.

[Rossoneri]

Thanks guys, I reasoned that 1♥ might give me better chances to show the 2-suiter but looks like I'm wrong!

[Fluffy]

I would try 1♥, wich gives me the time to play in clubs if its neccesary.

[Cascade]

Fluffy, on Aug 5 2010, 01:20 AM, said:

I would try 1♥, wich gives me the time to play in clubs if its neccesary.

... and the best chance to play in 1♥.

Actually despite my earlier statement that it is a normal 2♣ we routinely open these hands at the one-level and compensate by responding reasonably light. I didn't mention that earlier since the post was in the SAYC and 2/1 forum. In fact our strong opening is restricted in terms of distribution and our one-level openings are (almost) unlimited in terms of strength. This seems to rarely cost and sometimes gain.

[aguahombre]

Cascade, on Aug 4 2010, 12:56 PM, said:

Fluffy, on Aug 5 2010, 01:20 AM, said:

I would try 1♥, wich gives me the time to play in clubs if its neccesary.

... and the best chance to play in 1♥.

Actually despite my earlier statement that it is a normal 2♣ we routinely open these hands at the one-level and compensate by responding reasonably light. I didn't mention that earlier since the post was in the SAYC and 2/1 forum. In fact our strong opening is restricted in terms of distribution and our one-level openings are (almost) unlimited in terms of strength. This seems to rarely cost and sometimes gain.

yep. And for those of us who agree with that idea, the posted hand is a much closer choice between 1H and 2C. I chose 2C, but if pard chose 1H --fine.

[mike777]

Rossoneri, on Aug 3 2010, 03:30 PM, said:

---

2c

pard can never play me for a 2 loser hand if I open 1h.

[Rossoneri]

Cascade, on Aug 4 2010, 07:56 PM, said:

Fluffy, on Aug 5 2010, 01:20 AM, said:

I would try 1♥, wich gives me the time to play in clubs if its neccesary.

... and the best chance to play in 1♥.

Actually despite my earlier statement that it is a normal 2♣ we routinely open these hands at the one-level and compensate by responding reasonably light. I didn't mention that earlier since the post was in the SAYC and 2/1 forum. In fact our strong opening is restricted in terms of distribution and our one-level openings are (almost) unlimited in terms of strength. This seems to rarely cost and sometimes gain.

I get what you mean Wayne, in fact I try to respond with most 5 HCP hands (and sometimes even 4, if there's a reason to), but unfortunately my partner sticks to 6!