[Badmonster]

Most people play weak twos. My problem is, they don't seem to be playing the way I learned it. It was my understanding that if you respond with 2n they are required to respond with a feature, or a rebid, if they have no feature. However, more people I encounter pass my 2n, which ends badly. What is considered standard over 2n?

[Walddk]

Feature, shortage, Ogust (suit quality and range). Some play that you must have a maximum in order to show a feature.

Passing 2NT is not on option in standard responses to a weak two. The only bid that should be non forcing is raising the opening suit to the 3-level, also known as RONF = Raise Only Non Forcing.

Roland

[luke warm]

something that's worked out nicely for me is 'defined' ogust... it depends on your weak 2 range... using 3-9 after 2any : 2nt:

3c=3-5, 1 honor in the suit
3d=3-5, 2 honors
3h=6-9, 1 honor
3s=6-9, 2 honors
3nt=top 3 honors

[Walddk]

3-9 is a range too wide for me. 5-9 makes it a lot easier. By the way, you may consider playing 2♦ (Multi) as weak weak with either major (can even be 5 cards). Then 2MA are always constructive.

Roland

[Badmonster]

Is it necessary to play ogust?

[Walddk]

No. I mentioned feature or shortage. That will work equally well. Some hands are best suited for Ogust, some for feature and some for shortage. You can't get it all.

Roland

[P_Marlowe]

Badmonster, on May 30 2005, 11:30 AM, said:

Is it necessary to play ogust?

Hi,

if your weak 2's are crap, and wide ranging regarding suit quality,
you need to play Ogust, because in this case your partner sometimes
needs to know about the quality of your suit.

In this case it makes also sense, to play new suits as nonforcing.

If your suit quality always satifies certain criterias, you do not need
to play Ogust.
In this case it makes not really sense, to play new suits as nonforcing.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[luke warm]

Walddk, on May 30 2005, 10:29 AM, said:

3-9 is a range too wide for me. 5-9 makes it a lot easier. By the way, you may consider playing 2♦ (Multi) as weak weak with either major (can even be 5 cards). Then 2MA are always constructive.

Roland

i agree, it is maybe too wide... the good thing about ogust is, it's sometimes helpful in deciding whether or not to play nt... 'course the same can be said for feature ask

[pigpenz]

anymore weak twos have turned into crap shoot. Originally were contructive to getting to 3NT or 4 of a major....but some have become so destructive that partner cant even make an intelligent deciscion anymore Now I am talking about 1st and 2nd seat openings.

[mike777]

pigpenz, on May 31 2005, 12:08 PM, said:

anymore weak twos have turned into crap shoot. Originally were contructive to getting to 3NT or 4 of a major....but some have become so destructive that partner cant even make an intelligent deciscion anymore   Now I am talking about 1st and 2nd seat openings.

For a completely different take; in first and second seat think about not opening weak 2 bids with a side A or K or (poor suits, (unless Fav.)). Try it and see if you are happy with results.

[reisig]

The opening weak 2 bidder is NOT the captain of the team ..the responder is. So, when responder asks a question (whatever is requested)...you WILL answer. Passing 2N is like passing a Stayman bid (2♣) with a minimum NT and 5♣. Nobody has asked your opinion! Just try to remember what 2N asks ..feature, shortness, Ogust, etc. and nod and show what's asked. My experience is that opening terrible WEAK 2's opposite an unpassed partner leads to .....a new partner.

[luke warm]

wayne (cascade) is teaching on this on bbo in 12 minutes, if you're a member of the bil club... better hurry

[pigpenz]

mike777, on May 31 2005, 02:18 PM, said:

For a completely different take; in first and second seat think about not opening weak 2 bids with a side A or K or (poor suits, (unless Fav.)). Try it and see if you are happy with results.

yes i have tried it different ways, but the question is when people play this way they should let the opponents know that their methods are destructive or constructive. Its great to put the opponents to the guess but when partner gets caught in it too, thats not good.

[Chamaco]

Walddk, on May 30 2005, 04:36 PM, said:

No. I mentioned feature or shortage. That will work equally well. Some hands are best suited for Ogust, some for feature and some for shortage. You can't get it all.

Roland

Some people play that responder may use:
- 2NT as feature ask
- 3C as either "Ogust" or asking for shortness, or even asking for losers

Basically, responder would commonly use 2NT with a 3NT-oriented hand, and 3C with a suit-oriented hand.

This gives up the "natural" 3C response (when is the last time you used it ? ), but does allow responder to use 2 different useful tools :-)

[Double !]

aha
feature-ogust
how well does it work?
and, do the benefits of RONF out-weight the liabilities?

[Chamaco]

Quote

aha
feature-ogust
how well does it work?

It works ok.
Nothing spectacular, I have to say, so far I never won or lost a board because of this agreement.

I never regretted the "natural" 3C bid either, so far.

So I think it's just a matter of tastes.

Quote

and, do the benefits of RONF out-weight the liabilities?

If using "normal" weak 2s, I think RONF works well.

If using Fantoni-Nunes or EHAA or Ekren weak 2s, alternatives to RONF seem worth investigating, IMO.