[mgoetze]

I subscribe to the following theory:

awm, on 2010-July-30, 15:53, said:

In most of my 2/1 or SA-based partnerships I play 2♦ GF and 2♥ negative, much like Peachy described.

I will say that the more I play this style, the less happy I am with it. The problem is that auctions after 2♥ negative seem very bad.

cherdanno, on 2010-July-30, 19:34, said:

It's completely playable to just play 2♣ as game-forcing (except for a 2NT rebid) and just accept the occasional loss when that is too high. It is very rare that you can stop below game anyway.

Nevertheless, even I can see that it's not optimal to bid 2♦ in response to 2♣ 100% of the time.

The following idea struck me today while browsing some old threads:

2♥ 6-8 HCP, 3+ spades, 3+ hearts, 2+ diamonds, 2+ clubs
2♠ 9-11 HCP, 3+ spades, 3+ hearts, 2+ diamonds, 2+ clubs
2NT 6+ clubs [insert suit quality requirement here]
3♣ 6+ diamonds [insert suit quality requirement here]
3♦ 6+ hearts [insert suit quality requirement here]
3♥ 6+ spades [insert suit quality requirement here]
3♠ some HCP range, 1444/1435/1453 shape.

This would remove a large chunk of non-bust balanced hands from the 2♦ response. Sure, hands that are 4-2 majors would still be in there, but isn't it awfully convenient for opener with a 5 card major to just be able to set trump at the 3 level? Also opener could conceivably decide that some semibalanced shape like 1354 is worth a 2NT rebid after all. After said 2NT rebid, responder can place the contract as normal, and then opener can decide on the level.

Thoughts?

[akwoo]

First of all, I think best is playing 2♦ negative or waiting, with cheapest 3 level rebid being a second negative allowing play in 3 of a major. My experience is that this is better than 2♥ immediate negative, mostly because you can stop in 3♥. (Also, if you want to devote memory space to bids that never come up, it allows Kokish.)

Second, I think point showing responses by responder are generally less useful than control (A=2, K=1) showing responses. Unless you're playing in NT or they are in the trump suit, responders' queens and jacks tend to be useless. So I would modify 2♥ to be 2 controls instead of 6-8 points and 2♠ to be 3+ controls instead of 9-11.

[cherdano]

Han and I used to play 2♠ = balanced 8-10, no 4-card major, no 5-card minor. I think Fred may have posted that he played something like this with Brad Moss.
I don't think it's much of an issue whether 3M sets trumps over this - responder can just rebid 3N with a doubleton, and cuebid with 3-card support. These auctions seemed to be very precise (e.g. after 2S-2N = balanced you have a lot of space for responder to bid out his shape with a transfer structure).
The main advantage is that 8-10 opposite a 2C is a bit of an awkward range - it's not enough to force to slam, or even to have 5-level safety necessarily, but you need to show your values.

[suokko]

cherdanno, on 2010-July-30, 18:34, said:

It's completely playable to just play 2♣ as game-forcing (except for a 2NT rebid) and just accept the occasional loss when that is too high. It is very rare that you can stop below game anyway.

Surprising. I agree with Cherdanno even so much that 2♣-2♦;2NT can be agreed to be FG. But I do open very heavy at one level.

But for the actual response. I can't say directly if they have some problematic sequences other that locating side 4-4 major fit that is inherit problem of 2♣ opening if opener holds long minor as primary suit. But it looks very much playable agreement if you also agree subsequent auction well to be able to show shapes, fits and extra strength.

An alternative that game to my mind is to play 2♦ as only positive response and all other bids are negative showing the shape. Even balanced negative would pre-empt opener automatically but limiting values makes biding still easy for opener. That is surprising good alternative that I don't see played in practice (I have agreed it once a while back).

[nige1]

Over 2♣ (strong) - ?? John Matheson recommends the following

• 2♦ = ART. At most a K. Then 2N=23-24 bal. NF. 2♥ = Kokish. 5+♥ or 24+.
• 2♥ = ART. A or 2Ks.
• 2♠ = ART. A & K.
• 2N = ART (3Ks).
• ...

There is a case for reverse Kokish. 2♥ = 5+ ♥ or 23-24 Bal, giving responder a chance to bid a long weak minor at the 3-level i.e.
2♣-2♦
2♥-??

• 2♠ = ART. Normal puppet completion.
• 3♣/3♦ = NAT. 6+ cards.

[nige1]

mgoetze, on 2015-February-13, 18:49, said:

I subscribe to the following theory:
Nevertheless, even I can see that it's not optimal to bid 2♦ in response to 2♣ 100% of the time.
The following idea struck me today while browsing some old threads:

2♥ 6-8 HCP, 3+ spades, 3+ hearts, 2+ diamonds, 2+ clubs
2♠ 9-11 HCP, 3+ spades, 3+ hearts, 2+ diamonds, 2+ clubs
2NT 6+ clubs [insert suit quality requirement here]
3♣ 6+ diamonds [insert suit quality requirement here]
3♦ 6+ hearts [insert suit quality requirement here]
3♥ 6+ spades [insert suit quality requirement here]
3♠ some HCP range, 1444/1435/1453 shape.

This would remove a large chunk of non-bust balanced hands from the 2♦ response. Sure, hands that are 4-2 majors would still be in there, but isn't it awfully convenient for opener with a 5 card major to just be able to set trump at the 3 level? Also opener could conceivably decide that some semibalanced shape like 1354 is worth a 2NT rebid after all. After said 2NT rebid, responder can place the contract as normal, and then opener can decide on the level. Thoughts?

2N = 6+ ♣s might wrong-side no-trump, too often. Better might be ...

• 2♠ = TRF. 6+ ♣.
• 2N = BAL. 9+ HCP with tenaces

[Vampyr]

nige1, on 2015-February-14, 10:13, said:

There is a case for reverse Kokish. 2♥ = 5+ ♥ or 23-24 Bal, giving responder a chance to bid a long weak minor at the 3-level i.e.

IMO it is even more valuable to get out in 3minor if your "weak" balanced hand is 20-22-. I do not know what reverse Kokish means but as far as I know it is normal for the weaker hand to go through the puppet.

I agree with those who prefer a suit-based 2♣ opening to be GF.

[rmnka447]

I really like 2 ♦ waiting, cheapest suit as 2nd negative, and very disciplined positive responses.

The very disciplined positives are 2 M 5+ suit to 2+ honors and at least 1 1/2 QTs and 3 m 5+ suit with 2+ of 3 top honors and at least 2 QTs.

After a 2 M rebid by opener over 2 ♦, a raise to 3 M shows Qxx or better if holding 3 or xxxx(x..) and 8+ points. 4 M is to play. A 2 NT rebid by responder becomes a forward going bid showing 5-20 and inability to make another forward going bid. Non cheapest suit 3 level rebids are forward going showing something positive in suit bid, but not generally enough for the immediate positive response to 2 ♣.

2 ♣ openers have no more than 3 losers if the main suit is a minor or 4 losers if the suit is a major.

I feel we're way ahead of most when immediate positive responses occur. A 2 NT responder rebid becomes a GF, in effect, but saves bidding space for opener to continue describing his hand. Being thrifty in how you use bidding space is sometimes very useful in finding secondary fits and providing room to identify controls for game vs. slam decisions.

[Mbodell]

With one partner I play that over a 2♣-2♥ sequence that 2♠ by opener is an artificial puppet to 2nt letting the strong hand show a weak (in context) NF suit at the 3 level. A direct bid of a suit at the 3 level is then forcing allowing showing 2 suiters and/or game forces even over busts. It isn't perfect, but it helps over the busts.

[perko90]

A few thoughts. I've looked at 100s of computer generated 2C auctions and by far the biggest winner was knowing the difference between GF and bust replies. And the biggest loser was making space-consuming positive responses that were more often than not in partner's short suit. So, I highly recommend 2♦ = GF, 2♥ = bust. I also like Mbodell's treatment after the 2♥ response. Pretty cool. Also, if you're used to playing Puppet Stayman over 2NT, you'll want to just play regular Stayman following a 2♥ bust response.

[PrecisionL]

Deleted because of uncivil response.

I have other ideas for positive responses to 2♣ that have not been mentioned in this forum, but will not post them here.

[mgoetze]

WTF why is it impossible to talk about responses to 2♣ opening WITHOUT NEGATIVE RESPONSES like I specified at the beginning of this thread? I don't care that you're in love with them, go start your own thread or take one of the hundreds already in existence about them!