[mike777]

Fav vul.
Imps

2S=P=?

New suit by you is not forcing. 2NT can ask 5 or 6 spades and quality of hand if you wish.
Partner at this vul. may only have 5 spades. New partnership.

---

[hv=pc=n&s=sh

[jillybean]

pass

[akwoo]

I've never played new suit not forcing...

I think 4H. Partner is allowed to have xxxxxx Jxx Kxx x (or likely a bit better) - and that gives chances for an overtrick!

[apollo1201]

3H seems ok, we can trust partner to add the 4th one more often than not.

I would like a more self sustaining suit to try 4H alone.

[paulg]

It looks like a perfect hand for the methods, 3♥. If partner has a fit then they will raise and we'll hopefully be able to ruff one or both of our losing clubs.

[P_Marlowe]

If you can bid 3H nf, you should, why else have you agreed to play this.

[WasWinM]

I can understand the NV approach at match points but not at imps. This hand a remarkable exception and lucky to have 3H NF available.

[Cyberyeti]

WasWinM, on 2026-October-29, 07:04, said:

I can understand the NV approach at match points but not at imps. This hand a remarkable exception and lucky to have 3H NF available.

The less tightly defined your weak 2s the more you need this approach

[WasWinM]

Cyberyeti, on 2026-October-29, 07:35, said:

The less tightly defined your weak 2s the more you need this approach

Yes, and the longer the imp match the less one board can destroy you. But in shortish imps like Swill Teams I don't want to gamble but play solid bridge. Match points are a different beast.

[Cyberyeti]

WasWinM, on 2026-October-29, 11:59, said:

Yes, and the longer the imp match the less one board can destroy you. But in shortish imps like Swill Teams I don't want to gamble but play solid bridge. Match points are a different beast.

Weak 2s can be constructive, destructive or wide ranging, you pays your money and you takes your choice. Also you need to decide whether first seat is a gun preempting position, we decide it is.

[WasWinM]

Cyberyeti, on 2026-October-29, 12:19, said:

Weak 2s can be constructive, destructive or wide ranging, you pays your money and you takes your choice. Also you need to decide whether first seat is a gun preempting position, we decide it is.

Agree about first seat. Simple way I think of it is in first seat I have 2 opponents whose lives I can make miserable by bidding and only 1 partner.

[DavidKok]

I greatly enjoy NF change of suit regardless of preemptive style, and I highly recommend it over any alternative. So far I found that I had to add some weasel words like 'in my style I find that...' and 'well, double dummy simulations support..., but of course are not decisive', otherwise people would feel challenged. But you, dear reader (yes, you!) of course are excluded because of the nuances of your preemptive style, the form of scoring, the vulnerability and seating, the state of the match and/or your familiarity with your partner. I failed to consider these nuances - I've never even heard of seating, or how it might relate to preemption - and you do not have to change your mind. Ever.

[bluenikki]

DavidKok, on 2026-October-30, 11:36, said:

I greatly enjoy NF change of suit regardless of preemptive style, and I highly recommend it over any alternative. So far I found that I had to add some weasel words like 'in my style I find that...' and 'well, double dummy simulations support..., but of course are not decisive', otherwise people would feel challenged. But you, dear reader (yes, you!) of course are excluded because of the nuances of your preemptive style, the form of scoring, the vulnerability and seating, the state of the match and/or your familiarity with your partner. I failed to consider these nuances - I've never even heard of seating, or how it might relate to preemption - and you do not have to change your mind. Ever.

Does opener pass with a misfit?

Schenken made the case for nonforcing by citing a hand where Leventritt bid 3♣ on 7 to the jack after Schenken opened 2 of a major. I know what would happen to me if I bid such a suit.

[DavidKok]

bluenikki, on 2026-October-30, 12:14, said:

Does opener pass with a misfit?

With a maximum misfit opener can convert to NT or a new strain, just like regular dialogue bidding. With a minimum misfit you stay fixed, and you typically get a bad board. You 'never' go back to your own suit. For me the NF bid promises at least constructive values - weak misfit hands have to take their lumps and pass the preempt, obeying the adage to try to stay low on a misfit.

[mikeh]

bluenikki, on 2026-October-30, 12:14, said:

Does opener pass with a misfit?

Schenken made the case for nonforcing by citing a hand where Leventritt bid 3♣ on 7 to the jack after Schenken opened 2 of a major. I know what would happen to me if I bid such a suit.

You should take a look at how experts abused the new-fangled ‘weak two’ back in Schenken’s day. I have all The Bridge Worlds from those days and to say that weak two bidding was wildly variable and nobody had a coherent way of bidding after a weak two would be flattering to the players. I don’t think Schenken’s methods have aged well….although I loved the extremely rare Schenken 2D opening bid.