[FrancesHinden]

For any jurisdiction that uses the WBF definition of Brown Sticker bids, which of the following are BS bids which you can play with no prior warning, no requirement to provide a suggested defence, register in advance etc etc

Guess before you look up the rules.

1. 2C = a weak two in either major
2. 2H = 5+ cards in either hearts or spades with a 4-card club suit on the side

Which is easier to defend against?

[lamford]

FrancesHinden, on 2013-March-29, 06:34, said:

For any jurisdiction that uses the WBF definition of Brown Sticker bids, which of the following are BS bids which you can play with no prior warning, no requirement to provide a suggested defence, register in advance etc etc

Guess before you look up the rules.

1. 2C = a weak two in either major
2. 2H = 5+ cards in either hearts or spades with a 4-card club suit on the side

Which is easier to defend against?

I would expect neither to be BS, but I guess that 2 is. The first seems no different to a weak-only multi, and we have discussed that. The latter seems harder to defend, and I would welcome your suggested defence, as ever.

However, because you have asked the question, I guess that 1 is the BS bid.

[paulg]

I guess the second opening bid is fine because it has a known suit of four or more cards.

The Brown Sticker exemption for the Multi only applies to a two diamonds opening bid, as far as I recall.

To be fair to the WBF, the EBU permits BOTH these openers at Level 4, so almost all events, so that you can play them with no prior warning, no requirement to provide a suggested defence, register in advance etc etc.

[gnasher]

I guessed that (1) was Brown Sticker and (2) was not.

In fact, as I read the regulations, neither is Brown Sticker, but against (1) you are allowed to bring a written defence.

[Fluffy]

as long as the opps have a cuebid avaible the opening is fine.

Second one is harder to defend because we have multi defences that apply to the first, and because the opener is higher, but if we knew in advance this was coming it would be pretty easy to defend against.

[FrancesHinden]

Fluffy, on 2013-March-30, 06:35, said:

as long as the opps have a cuebid avaible the opening is fine.

Second one is harder to defend because we have multi defences that apply to the first, and because the opener is higher, but if we knew in advance this was coming it would be pretty easy to defend against.

Really? It strikes me as very difficult to defend against (much harder than the first)

[JanM]

FrancesHinden, on 2013-March-31, 15:18, said:

Really? It strikes me as very difficult to defend against (much harder than the first)

Me too! Especially since you can look at the defense to a multi 2♣ opening, and if you don't happen to have a defense to that, you can use your multi 2♦ defense - you won't have as good a defense as you could, but it will work fine. On the other hand, defending against a bid that might or might not be natural is extremely difficult.

[campboy]

I knew that neither was brown sticker, but didn't realise you were allowed to bring a written defence to either.

However, the WBF has presumably decided that whether you can bring a defence to a pre-emptive opening depends simply on whether or not it is anchored. Is it any surprise that there are some anchored openings which are harder to defend than some unanchored ones, even though in general unanchored is harder? Short of having a much more complicated rule you are always going to have the problem that it doesn't exactly correspond to how hard the bid is to defend.

2♣ showing a weak two in either red suit is easier to defend than either of these IMO, but actually is BS.

[bluejak]

FrancesHinden, on 2013-March-29, 06:34, said:

For any jurisdiction that uses the WBF definition of Brown Sticker bids, which of the following are BS bids which you can play with no prior warning, no requirement to provide a suggested defence, register in advance etc etc

Guess before you look up the rules.

1. 2C = a weak two in either major
2. 2H = 5+ cards in either hearts or spades with a 4-card club suit on the side

Which is easier to defend against?

Ok, I have guessed. Neither is BS.

1. Standard exception for the Multi applies to 2♣ as well as 2♦

2. Always shows clubs.

1. is easier, naturally, because we have a Multi defence, and it works over 2♣.

2. is quite tricky! Double for takeout of hearts I think and just accept the odd five off for our game in hearts!

Now to read the rest of the thread.

[bluejak]

paulg, on 2013-March-29, 08:05, said:

To be fair to the WBF, the EBU permits BOTH these openers at Level 4, so almost all events, so that you can play them with no prior warning, no requirement to provide a suggested defence, register in advance etc etc.

2♥ is not Level 4. It neither shows hearts nor denies hearts.

[mjj29]

bluejak, on 2013-April-18, 16:40, said:

2♥ is not Level 4. It neither shows hearts nor denies hearts.

No, but it has an anchor suit in clubs (for reference, I believe that it was meant to be (5+H and 4 clubs) or (5+S and 4 clubs), it's possible that it didn't parse that way for you)

[MickyB]

bluejak, on 2013-April-18, 16:40, said:

2♥ is not Level 4. It neither shows hearts nor denies hearts.

12G7b1 says otherwise, I was surprised too.

[nige1]

FrancesHinden, on 2013-March-29, 06:34, said:

For any jurisdiction that uses the WBF definition of Brown Sticker bids, which of the following are BS bids which you can play with no prior warning, no requirement to provide a suggested defence, register in advance etc etc. Guess before you look up the rules.
1. 2C = a weak two in either major
2. 2H = 5+ cards in either hearts or spades with a 4-card club suit on the side
Which is easier to defend against?

I guessed:

• The former is BS (I'm surprised to learn it isn't). By analogy with the Multi, you might also guess that you have to provide an approved written defence, for Americans to consult at the table
• The latter is OK because of the four-card anchor suit; I agree it seems more difficult to defend

[bluejak]

MickyB, on 2013-April-18, 17:09, said:

12G7b1 says otherwise, I was surprised too.

That's what comes of quoting things from memory instead of looking them up. Mea culpa.