Linda Lee — My personal bridge blog

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:


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.


PaulAugust 23rd, 2008 at 2:07 pm

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.

LindaAugust 24th, 2008 at 11:02 am

Interesting. It does seem a little awkward when you have an invitational hand with spades and partner has hearts


if partner can’t satand spades I suppose they pass and hope for the best. I would only try this auction with great spades.

Roy HughesAugust 25th, 2008 at 10:08 pm

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.

John Portwood (UK)August 22nd, 2011 at 6:55 am

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: ?





If you now bid 4S (and why not?) you go for 2300!

Leave a comment

Your comment