[wank]

I see they play or played 2C as 6+ clubs or club/spade canape and 2R to accommodate the Hm hands. Obviously they lose a weak 2H which seems like a bit of a catastrophe to me and they are still stuck with the 5+S4+D hands to open at the 1 level.

I was wondering whether it would be too overloaded to play both 2m openers as 6+ without a major or canape with an undisclosed major, limited HCP obviously.

Possible for 2C but too much for 2D maybe?

Views?

[Phil]

wank, on 2015-July-28, 08:12, said:

I see they play or played 2C as 6+ clubs or club/spade canape and 2R to accommodate the Hm hands. Obviously they lose a weak 2H which seems like a bit of a catastrophe to me and they are still stuck with the 5+S4+D hands to open at the 1 level.

I was wondering whether it would be too overloaded to play both 2m openers as 6+ or canape with an undisclosed major, limited HCP obviously.

Views?

Sounds like what Louk plays with Russ Ekeblad.

[WGF_Flame]

2♣ - C or S + C
2♦ - H + D
2♥ - H + C
2♠ - S + D

[DinDIP]

I know people play them but openings like 2♣ showing a C single-suiter OR 5+M and 4+C are unplayable IMO. Responder has so many difficulties with simple hands (for example a 5-4-3-1 9 count where you want to be in game if opener has S>=C, possibly invite game if opener has H>=C, and 2C if he has a C single-suiter). Yes, the odds favour the C single-suiter option but the costs of getting the decision wrong are high.

When the opponents compete responder's problems become even worse. (Yes, the opponent's bidding can sometimes help responder to form a better picture of what opener has but who wants to rely on the opponents bidding accurately?)

And if you think the problems are bad when the opening is 2♣, they are significantly worse if you open 2♦ with the same set of hands (but the minor switched). If 2♥ is used as a relay or enquiry (as 2♦ is after a 2♣ opening) then responder can no longer bid hearts naturally at the two level. If 2♥ is natural then an even higher bid has to be used as the relay, and the natural meaning of that bid is lost.

[kenrexford]

WGF_Flame, on 2015-July-29, 07:53, said:

2♣ - C or S + C
2♦ - H + D
2♥ - H + C
2♠ - S + D

That's an unexpected lineup. What's the strength? A reasonable intermediate lineup would be to have three problem holdings, spades plus a minor and hearts with clubs, the three high reverse holdings. This lineup is out of sync with that, and I wonder why.

[rbforster]

Another possibility:

2♣ - hearts + minor
2♦ - both minors
2♥ - both majors
2♠ - spades + minor

[benlessard]

Ive said it already but for me 2Y directly as single suiter and 1M-1Y-2M as the 2 suiter is just a lot better than the other way around.

2S as S+minor and values is imo just awful.

Hand with 6S and values are more likely to be safe in 2S & 2S is likely to be best partscore anyway. With a 5S+4m 2S can be a dangerous spot and there is a lot of partscore possibility that can be better than 2S and 3m.

For example we play that

1S-1NT-2S is 5S+4C 11-14. However its possible to play 1S-2H and 1S-2D as NF or some transfers so its still possible to stop in 2 red wich is often a lot better than 2S/3C.

Of course there is other considerations if you play a relay system but for most system there is few reasonnable reasons to play 2M as contructive 5M+4 elsewhere.