Trying to build a better multi mouse trap
The Lee’s are playing Multi 2D to show a weak 2 bid in a major. The systems I have played in the past over this have some problems. I couldn’t find much on the web so we have started to explore some strategies for improvements.
One problem we came up across was how to handle the auction:
2D-2H-2S
Hearing partner has spades you want to make a game try while with hearts you weren’t interested.
This was relatively easy to fix with some system. We decided that 2NT asked for a feature (as over 2S) but partner could just bid 4S with good trump and a decent hand.
I have also found a number of problems when responder has an invitational hand or a strong two suiter with the other major. In most systems
2D-3m is NAT and forcing one round so I suppose you could start with 3m on the latter hand.
Anyway, we are now trying out 2D-3C showing the at least 5 hearts and at least invitational values and 2D-3D showing the same thing with spades. We have been developing auction continuations. It seems to work fairly well since these hands are much more frequent than a hand where you want to make a forcing bid in a minor. However Colin did come out with one bizarre hand over 2D. He had S – void H 5 D AQ1092 C AKQ10987 and over 2D he just punted 6C. We did agree that 5NT would have been pick a minor but on this type of hand I don’t think that helps.
Anyway, I would be interested if anyone has a system that they really like over multi.
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related
I play the Polish (WJ05) response structure where (over 2D):
3C = any strong 1-suiter or 2-suiter. Opener bids 3D and responder’s next bid is forcing.
With an invitational hand with 6-card major, bid and rebid your major – e.g., 2D-2H-2S-3H is invitational.
Interesting. It does seem a little awkward when you have an invitational hand with spades and partner has hearts
2D-2S-3H-3S
if partner can’t satand spades I suppose they pass and hope for the best. I would only try this auction with great spades.
I designed a method of responding to the multi (all-weak version) about 30 years ago. At the time it seemed very complicated, but by today’s standards maybe it isn’t.
The basic responses are the usual ones: any number of hearts is pass-or-correct; 2NT is an artificial inquiry. 3 of a suit, other than hearts, is natural and forcing.
After 2D-2N, opener rebids 3C whenever his suit is spades (this is an equitable division of bidding space); all other bids show hearts, simultaneously giving extra information about singletons, range and side aces and kings.
After 2D-2N;3C, 3D forces to game, agreeing spades while asking for a singleton. 3H is natural and forcing one round, while 3S is invitational.
After the natural, forcing response of 3 of a minor, I felt that it was important for opener to clarify which major he held. He does this by bidding 3H whenever holding hearts; all other bids are natural and confirm spades as the primary suit.
When holding an invitational hand with hearts, responder employs a “trick”. He begins with 2H; opener, who inevitably will hold spades, rebids 2S. Now 3H is invitational. Responder’s rebids of 2N, 3C and 3D are also natural, invitational with long hearts.
If you can’t design a sensible set of responses to the Multi 2D then perhaps it is flawed.
The multi was designed mainly as a pre-emptive measure but has the disadvantage that the responder doesn’t know the suit in which the opener has pre-empted. Any defender worth their salt has a defence to the multi – the simplest (X = TO of 2H, 2H = TO of 2S) so the system is at a disadvantage in the competitive auction.
For an extreme example see “The Abbot’s Great Sacrifice” – David Bird.
Bidding (Red V White)
2D (Multi): 3H: ?
S: KXXX
H: KXXX
D: AQX
C: XX
If you now bid 4S (and why not?) you go for 2300!