[whereagles]

Cross-imp pairs, expert opps, expert but overbidder pard (lol).

---

RHO is usually solid with his preempts. The 2♦ is multi, with no strong options, so it's non-forcing. In fact, you've seen LHO pass it on occasion.

Your gadgets are:

- Dbl = 12-14 balanced or any 18+, lebensohl by responder ON.
- 2NT = 15-18 system on
- 2H/S = take-out of S/H
- 3x = natural
- Pass + action = weaker than direct action

Bid?

[wank]

yes i bid. the bid i choose is 2nt. 2nd choice: pass. 3rd choice: stupid

[wank]

oops

[MrAce]

If u agree with your pd that opponents can not play it undoubled when they pass an artificial bid then you wont have to worry about 2♦ being passed out. Without this i would bid 2 NT.

[Cascade]

I think your agreements are poor if you can't make a simple overcall in a major.

[cloa513]

Cascade, on 2012-February-05, 17:47, said:

I think your agreements are poor if you can't make a simple overcall in a major.

I think his agreements are poor because it doesn't make the simple assumption that opener's hand is a weak two in hearts then choose the bids as though that was true.

[whereagles]

Cascade, on 2012-February-05, 17:47, said:

I think your agreements are poor if you can't make a simple overcall in a major.

The agreements I shown are sort of standard around here, where most top pairs use the multi For the record I actually prefer other schemes, which do allow for natural overcalls (pard prefers the standard one).

[Zelandakh]

There are many defences to the Multi out there. The one described is Dixon and is standard in the UK. 2♠, limited take-out of hearts, is essentially your 2-level overcall here. A 3 level overcall is also limited but promises a 6 card suit. You have 2 choices, 2NT or 2♠. On this hand the spades are poor enough to treat them as 4 so I think 2NT is best. With better spades I would start with 2♠ and rebid 3♠ should partner advance in diamonds.

[whereagles]

Oh this actually has a name How's this other one called?

2♦ ??

Dbl = take out of spades
2♥ = take out of hearts
2♠ = natural

[gwnn]

whereagles, on 2012-February-06, 04:16, said:

The agreements I shown are sort of standard around here, where most top pairs use the multi For the record I actually prefer other schemes, which do allow for natural overcalls (pard prefers the standard one).

No wonder most top pairs use the multi if this is the standard defence

(trolling off: I used this defence too but X was either a 2M overcall or 18+ any).

[whereagles]

That one sound like "multi vs multi"

[gwnn]

Yes except there's two variants of that (well probably 20 is closer to the real number): I think in the original version 2M was a t/o of M not of oM.

[Zelandakh]

whereagles, on 2012-February-06, 04:20, said:

Oh this actually has a name How's this other one called?

I just know this is as the "ACBL recommeded defence". Gwnn's "double = 1 major or a big hand" is, as you say, multi versus multi. All of these, plus a transfer defence, are listed at Chris Ryall's site.

[gnasher]

Zelandakh, on 2012-February-06, 04:17, said:

There are many defences to the Multi out there. The one described is Dixon and is standard in the UK.

It was standard in the UK about 20 years ago. Nowadays almost everyone I know plays natural overcalls, but maybe it's a regional thing.

A few years ago the Bridge World carried out a survey of methods against a Multi. Two different respondents presented methods that they said were "standard in the UK" (or they may have said England). They were, of course, completely different.

[Fluffy]

in Madrid we also play a lot the 2M short defence. I still play it with my father, I haven't missed the 2M overcall very often but I don' t think its best.


On the given hand I would bid 2NT regardless of my methods.


I disagree with MrAce about 2♦ being forcing for us, seems to me that agreement can be exploited by opponents with strong hands.

[Codo]

In Germany, against the multi many players play 2 M, 2 NT natural (with MAJOJS Stopped), X take out against spades or 18+ leaping Michaels.

For the given hand, 2 NT seems easy.

[bigbenvic]

Rarely come across a weak only multi (except 4+4+ Majors) 2♦ other than wk either Major. Does it have any other options? ie 3 suited weak 2 suited wk, minor pre-empt?

If its just weak either major I use x=16+ unbal (or 21+bal) 2nt as 15-18 Bal and 2 major natural good suit overcall (12+ points but stress good suit) Also use leaping Michaels. 3c/d would be Nat almost always a 6 card suit (good quality) and circa 13-15 points

So here it's an easy x, I don't like using 2nt here as pards can mistake my hand for Balanced, maybe he bids 6♦ and now what do you do?

Pass (and do something next round if there is one) is my second option but I don't like it much.

[whereagles]

Thanks all. This was the full hand:

---

I held the North cards. I decided against pass because I felt LHO might be loaded with diamonds and pass this. Afterwards he said he would indeed pass 2♦. I didn't dbl because I wasn't strong enough to pull pard's response to spades, especially with that moth-eaten suit. So that seemed to leave me with an off shape 2NT. Here's what followed:

(2♦) ...

2NT 3♣ (puppet)
3♠ 4NT
..??

Pard intended this as quantitative, but it is actually RKCB for spades. Even if it were indeed quantitative, that would be WILDLY optimistic (I told you he overbids lol).

As to what happened in the end, I'll spare you the details. Suffice to say chalk +1 to the multi. Or rather +55 cross-imps

[Fluffy]

WTF were you doing answering 3 spades with both majors? giving any blame to partner after that is ridicoulous

[whereagles]

You're right. I must make a note to incorporate a 5-4 majors response to puppet

Seriously now, I should have made the following clarification: pard can puppet on a 3-card major. 3♣ does not promise a 4-card major. Since I had to guess what to respond, I judged pard to be a favorite to hold a 3-3 or 3-2 majors and hence the spade bid.