[jillybean]

After saying I'm only going to be playing Multi for a few weeks so I'm not going to worry about tweaking it, this part of my agreement is not sitting well with me.

We play 2D Multi as weak 2 Major or 20-22 balanced.
2C opening is 23+
2NT opening shows 55 in the Majors.

I don't like the 20-22 range but it seems to be very common here, as does 2C 23+

If I continue to play it back in North America, I'd like to tighten it up to 20-21, 2C 22+

[steve2005]

Having a strong option with a Multi is a big disadvantage according to Kit Woolsey.

[jillybean]

Does Kit elaborate on that?

I'm aware others do not play the strong option but for now, I'm having fun with the weak Major/Strong balanced and that is what is played around here.

[DavidKok]

https://bridgewinner...-strong-option/ contains a recent discussion on weak-only versus weak-or-possibly-strong multi.

I've got some guesses but no experience facing the weak-only multi. As far as I can tell the method wins substantially from recovering the ability to pass partner's artificial bid, either directly (playing 2♦ in spite of the major suit length) or on competitive auctions (such as 2♦-(X)-3♥ 'pass or correct or just drop it here even if you have spades', which I must admit I don't really understand). In general I am a big fan of playing nonforcing preempts, as it greatly increases the pressure on LHO. I've played with and against the strong-or-weak multi for years and it seems everybody is too timid to pass partner's multi even when it is right. My guess is that these nonforcing bids not promising much of length or strength in any suit would work nearly as well over a weak-or-strong multi, but fear of the infrequent strong option prevents people from trying them (just like people tend to not make preemptive raises of 2♣ 'any strong, or weak with diamonds' or 'any strong, or weak with both majors'). Personally I've only ever passed partner's strong-or-weak multi twice, both to great success (and also shock on partner's side, who had never seen this before. Two different partners, obviously).

Realistically I think the weak-only multi players are introducing the next generation of germ warfare, and the strong-or-weak multi players are just slow to incorporate these methods (but I expect these methods to work comparatively well regardless of multi variant, with some swings on the strong hand boards).

Lastly if your intent is to pass partner's artificial preempt frequently I would consider some options other than multi. You can increase the safety and frequency by focusing on other hand types than long major-suited ones, notably two- or three-suiters including diamonds. As always the multi is mostly attractive to plug system holes, it is not a great winner by itself.

[AL78]

DavidKok, on 2023-February-24, 12:53, said:

Realistically I think the weak-only multi players are introducing the next generation of germ warfare, and the strong-or-weak multi players are just slow to incorporate these methods (but I expect these methods to work comparatively well regardless of multi variant, with some swings on the strong hand boards).

I didn't know that weak only Multi was allowed at EBU level 4.

[Cyberyeti]

AL78, on 2023-February-24, 13:00, said:

I didn't know that weak only Multi was allowed at EBU level 4.

Yes it is, a 5+ card suit that can't be the suit bid is permissible.

I don't think it should be as it fails the sort of tests that caused the L&E to outlaw 4 card weak 2s (like it not being obvious how to defend as a number of the old defences use 6th seat actions you might not get with a weak only multi)

[LBengtsson]

jillybean, on 2023-February-24, 11:31, said:

After saying I'm only going to be playing Multi for a few weeks so I'm not going to worry about tweaking it, this part of my agreement is not sitting well with me.

We play 2D Multi as weak 2 Major or 20-22 balanced.
2C opening is 23+
2NT opening shows 55 in the Majors.

I don't like the 20-22 range but it seems to be very common here, as does 2C 23+

If I continue to play it back in North America, I'd like to tighten it up to 20-21, 2C 22+

Just a personal view but I do not like 2NT opening as 55M - what range for this bid? And what do 2♥/2♠ opening bid show if you now use 2♦ as either weak major?

[mikeh]

DavidKok, on 2023-February-24, 12:53, said:

https://bridgewinner...-strong-option/ contains a recent discussion on weak-only versus weak-or-possibly-strong multi.

I've got some guesses but no experience facing the weak-only multi. As far as I can tell the method wins substantially from recovering the ability to pass partner's artificial bid, either directly (playing 2♦ in spite of the major suit length) or on competitive auctions (such as 2♦-(X)-3♥ 'pass or correct or just drop it here even if you have spades', which I must admit I don't really understand). In general I am a big fan of playing nonforcing preempts, as it greatly increases the pressure on LHO. I've played with and against the strong-or-weak multi for years and it seems everybody is too timid to pass partner's multi even when it is right. My guess is that these nonforcing bids not promising much of length or strength in any suit would work nearly as well over a weak-or-strong multi, but fear of the infrequent strong option prevents people from trying them (just like people tend to not make preemptive raises of 2♣ 'any strong, or weak with diamonds' or 'any strong, or weak with both majors'). Personally I've only ever passed partner's strong-or-weak multi twice, both to great success (and also shock on partner's side, who had never seen this before. Two different partners, obviously).

Realistically I think the weak-only multi players are introducing the next generation of germ warfare, and the strong-or-weak multi players are just slow to incorporate these methods (but I expect these methods to work comparatively well regardless of multi variant, with some swings on the strong hand boards).

Lastly if your intent is to pass partner's artificial preempt frequently I would consider some options other than multi. You can increase the safety and frequency by focusing on other hand types than long major-suited ones, notably two- or three-suiters including diamonds. As always the multi is mostly attractive to plug system holes, it is not a great winner by itself.

I played weak/17+ 4441 for several years. Hated it. The 4441 hands almost never came up (I think only 3% of hands are 4441 and far fewer are 17+ hcp)

I’ve been playing weak only for at least ten years (that includes about five years where I didn’t play more than three or four sessions a year) and am much happier.

Not only can we pass 2D (which is rare but seems to catch most opps off guard) but we get to ‘do things’ as responder. Things you can’t afford to do if partner has any strong hand, whether the 4441 or the big balanced hand.

I think the biggest difference between bidding fifty years ago and now is that 50 years ago virtually all of the thinking, other than outliers like Bergen, was that the way to win was to have sound constructive bidding methods and to avoid mistakes whereas today, in addition to a proliferation of sophisticated constructive methods, there’s a lot of attention paid, at the expert level, to being ‘difficult to play against’, which is attained via multi-purpose largely obstructive bidding methods, where ambiguity arises frequently.

[DavidKok]

Yes, I'm saying one should respond and bid opposite the strong-or-weak multi as if it is weak-only, and accept that it will hurt you one the rare strong hands. Playing a docile response structure for some low frequency hand type sounds lousy.

[jillybean]

LBengtsson, on 2023-February-24, 14:04, said:

Just a personal view but I do not like 2NT opening as 55M - what range for this bid? And what do 2♥/2♠ opening bid show if you now use 2♦ as either weak major?

I don't like the idea of 2NT opening 55M but I've never played it.

2M opening in our Multi system shows 5Major + 5/4 (V/NV) of another , 2H = H + another, 2S = S and a minor.

[heart76]

The two main groups that use multi are:
- those that hate the wide range of weak 2 preempts and use the so-called "trash-multi" while keeping their weak 2s
- those that want to have a broader preempt spectrum and have weak 2s through multi alongside 2M tartan/muiderberg
Particularly this second group, I would say, also adopts 2NT as both MINORS, typ.5-5+, some just weak, some either weak or 17/18+, and thus has their 20-21 NT also in their multi.

There is no crash between the weak and strong options, so I am not catching what the issue Kit W. shall have mentioned can be.

Whichever group you're in, multi is there to widen your preempts, and does so very efficiently in many cases. But beware the abuse, the weakest preempts need to be well judged and you have to accept some isolated disasters, particularly if you adopt tartan/muiderberg 5-4 or better. It really is a lot seat a vulnerability dependent for the most.

Multi shouldn't be played against less-than-average opponents IMHO and ought to be pre-alerted, although not obligatory, in formal events where its adoption is uncommon.

[jillybean]

heart76, on 2023-February-25, 17:02, said:

The two main groups that use multi are:
- those that hate the wide range of weak 2 preempts and use the so-called "trash-multi" while keeping their weak 2s
- those that want to have a broader preempt spectrum and have weak 2s through multi alongside 2M tartan/muiderberg
Particularly this second group, I would say, also adopts 2NT as both MINORS, typ.5-5+, some just weak, some either weak or 17/18+, and thus has their 20-21 NT also in their multi.

There is no crash between the weak and strong options, so I am not catching what the issue Kit W. shall have mentioned can be.

Whichever group you're in, multi is there to widen your preempts, and does so very efficiently in many cases. But beware the abuse, the weakest preempts need to be well judged and you have to accept some isolated disasters, particularly if you adopt tartan/muiderberg 5-4 or better. It really is a lot seat a vulnerability dependent for the most.

Multi shouldn't be played against less-than-average opponents IMHO and ought to be pre-alerted, although not obligatory, in formal events where its adoption is uncommon.

We are in the second group and play 2H/2S as 5+5 V, 5+4 NV

Your comment "Multi shouldn't be played against less-than-average opponents" is interesting, in which part of the world do you play?