[kenberg]

I have long thought that the most obvious gap in bridge literature concerns defenses to various conventions. Myself, I have never had much interest in playing a convention that gets good results often (I don't say only or even mainly) because casual players have not discussed how to handle it.

Anyway, I ask:

1. Against a multi-2♦ opening what do you prefer?
2. Against a 2M opening that is weak, showing M and a minor, or M and another (these are frequent agreements by multi players) what do you prefer?
3. Feel free to vary these questions a bit, keeping with the spirit of defenses to common (multi is "common" in the sense that it is not some weirdo thing few have ever heard of) conventions that many have never prepared their defenses for.

Eg I know the acbl has recommended defenses for the multi, and I use them, but they require a bit more discussion I think.

[hrothgar]

 kenberg, on 2011-December-09, 08:11, said:

I have long thought that the most obvious gap in bridge literature concerns defenses to various conventions. Myself, I have never had much interest in playing a convention that gets good results often (I don't say only or even mainly) because casual players have not discussed how to handle it.

The anti-missile missile is new and improved regulation.

If we ban anything that threatens the glorious methods we prefer to play we can dispense with the need to develop effective defenses or, indeed, ever deal with something new and different.

In all seriousness, why do you think that the idiots in Memphis suddenly decided that opening 1♣ with a 4=4=3=2 hand is natural?

This has nothing to do with the definition of natural and everything to do with banning artificial overcalls.
(And, I'd bet dollars to donuts, this has a hell of a lot less to do with the ACBL than with the USBF...)

[Trinidad]

There are some good defense against Multi around, but you will have to discuss the follow-ups in detail. You also have to understand the "pass or correct" philosophy in the Multi.

The 2M bids showing a five card major and a side suit/minor are easy to defend against: Just use your defense against weak twos. (Take out doubles, Lebensohl, Leaping Michaels, tralala).

Multi defenses:
I think the Meckwell defense is good (Direct seat: Everything natural, X=13-15 NT with "something in majors" or any strong, 2NT=16-18).

I personally like a defense where the overcaller immediately identifies the weak two when possible. On those hands it converts the multi opening to a regular weak two, putting you on firm ground again. It also gives you a cuebid. This means that you need two takeout bids (one for short spades and one for short hearts). I prefer: X= short hearts or too strong to overcall and 2♥ = limited takeout double of spades. You can also play the other way around: X= short spades or too strong to overcall and 2♥ = limited takeout double of hearts. This has the advantage that you have two artificial and forcing bids. You could put another hand type in the 2♥ bid since it is forcing.

A fun defense is Multi vs Multi. While probably not the best around, this one is particularly easy if you play Multi yourself: 2♥ and 2♠ are the two takeout bids. (I like them to show shortness in the other suit and non forcing, but you can flip those.) With an overcall in a major, you double. After this, you use the same system that you use when you open a Multi 2♦ yourself. (The only thing is that you are not allowed to Reredouble. )

The general philosophy in fourth seat (2♦-Pass-2♥/♠-?) should be that you defend as if your RHO opened a weak two in the suit he bid. If you think that opener has a weak two in the other suit, you can pass, since opener will correct and than you can show your hand in 8th seat.

In 6th seat, I like the following little trick:
2NT shows a five (+) card minor with four in the major that the opponents bid.
3m shows that five (+) card minor with four in the major that the opponents didn't bid.

Rik

[Free]

1. I prefer to consider it as a 2♥ opening and bid accordingly. Dbl is takeout for ♥, 2♥ is natural (=exception!) but not strong enough to wait a round and bid 3♥, 4m is 5-5 ♠+m,... Passing first and bidding again is considering a 2♠ opening (which it usually is). So with 5-5 ♥+m you wait a round and bid 4m in your second turn. With a takeout of ♠, you pass first and Dbl later. Funny thing is that you sometimes have penalty doubles, for example 2♦-p-2♥-p-p-Dbl (can't be takeout, or you would've doubled immediately).

2. I consider them all natural. If they promisse a second suit, I ignore it in the bidding. Takeout doubles, lebensohl, leaping Michaels,...

3. Note that the defense in 1 isn't perfect against minimulti (= weak only, so NF). It's not dangerous when opps are V, but when NV they may easily pass! So perhaps another defense is required in that case.

[awm]

We use X = takeout of spades, 2♥ = natural, 2♠ = 4♥ longer minor, 2NT+ are natural with transfer advances of 3m. After 2♦-P-2M we treat their major suit bid as natural.

This is amusingly the "opposite" of Free's defense. Our reasoning is that this puts us substantially ahead of the field when opponents have a spade preempt and open multi instead of 2♠. When opponents have a heart preempt it will often be easier to back in later (bidding spades over hearts is easier than bidding hearts over spades).

[blackshoe]

 awm, on 2011-December-09, 10:09, said:

After 2♦-P-2M we treat their major suit bid as natural.

Apparently I'm not awake yet. I read this as "after 2 PM we …"

[mwalimu02]

 blackshoe, on 2011-December-09, 10:42, said:

Apparently I'm not awake yet. I read this as "after 2 PM we …"

Hahaha! Guilty too