[Zelandakh]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-August-16, 02:48, said:

I'm suggesting weak 2, 2N type and strong 4441 any singleton, I don't include the strong 2 minor. If I include the minor I don't include the 4441, only 3 basic types. The one I really dislike is strong 2 any suit which I have seen.

This seems to be just fine - 4 types is manageable. The strong 3-suiter is not without its problems over, for example, a 3NT response. It is not always clear whether the hand is strong or weak without good agreements. But without having to devote bids to the strong minor suit hands there is enough space to sort it all out - do you play 4m over 3NT shows this hand, for example? Having said this, I am not entirely sure it is not better to include a Roman 2NT into the 2C structure - there is enough space to do this once you have a strong balanced hand in 2D.

[Cyberyeti]

Zelandakh, on 2011-August-16, 03:06, said:

This seems to be just fine - 4 types is manageable. The strong 3-suiter is not without its problems over, for example, a 3NT response. It is not always clear whether the hand is strong or weak without good agreements. But without having to devote bids to the strong minor suit hands there is enough space to sort it all out - do you play 4m over 3NT shows this hand, for example? Having said this, I am not entirely sure it is not better to include a Roman 2NT into the 2C structure - there is enough space to do this once you have a strong balanced hand in 2D.

I play 3N response as 5-9 ish 4-4 majors, so this hand is no issue, I just bid 4M to play unless too big.

Good responding hands go via 2N, and I rebid the suit below the singleton at the 4 level with the 3 suiter, pretty much slam forcing.

2♦-2♥-
P/2N are obvious, 3suit = 4441 singleton in the suit above

2♦-2♠- is slightly more complicated

3♣ is 3-way good weak 2 in ♥ or 1444/4414 big, over this 3♦ is a re-ask
3♦ is 4144
3♥ is bad weak 2 in ♥
3♠ is 4441

[MrAce]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-August-16, 02:48, said:

Also a number of the multi defences involve passing some hands that could overcall and you tend to frighten them off when you show the strong type.

It always surprised me to see players who are happy when they preempt and opponents pass.

[Cyberyeti]

MrAce, on 2011-August-16, 16:31, said:

It always surprised me to see players who are happy when they preempt and opponents pass.

If you have a hand with a 12 count and 5 spades and play Dixon or similar where 2♦-2♠ shows a T/O X of ♥, you pass then bid 2♠ over 2♦-P-2♥-P-P but don't offer your neck on the chopping block if opener is strong.

[nige1]

IMO, Multi is best played 2-way...

• Weak two in a major (may be 5-card).
• Strong 4441.

The 4441 option makes competition slightly more risky.
Pre-emptive responses require 4-card major(s) and may actually facilitate slam-bidding.

Over 2♦ - ??

• 2♥ = Pass/Correct.
• 2N = Relay.
• 2♠/3♣/3♦/3♥ = Natural forcing (2♠ is not weak with 4+♥ -- just helps opponents familiar with Multi).
• 3♠/4♣/4♦ = Weak with both majors.
• 3N/4♥/4♠ = Natural to play.

Over 2♦ - 2♥ - ??

• Pass = Weak with ♥.
• 2♠ = Weak with ♠.
• 2N/3♣/3♦/3♥ = Strong 1444/ 4441/4414/4144.

Over 2♦ - 2N (relay) - ??

• 3♣ = Strong 444. (3♦ relays for singleton).
• 3♦/3♥ = Minimum. Transfers.
• 3♥/3♠ = Maximum. With unbid major. Effectively transfers.
• 3N = AKQxx or AKJxx of either major.

[Edit: whereagles points out that last paragraph is rubbish -- see later post for correction]

Multi is popular and effective in Europe but the ACBL seems chauvinist and protective of its local players. I'm told that the the ACBL encourages players to bring their own written-defence to the table and allows them to consult that 1000 page crib, during the auction Bridge it may be -- but not as we know it

UK experience is that players honestly explain Multi. When asked about 2/1 gadgets like Bergen, Puppet Stayman, 2-way check-back, Gazzilli and so on, players tend to be economical with the truth, probably because the negative inferences are more complex and hard to explain.

[whereagles]

huh...? how come 3♥ shows both a min and a max???

[Vampyr]

Zelandakh, on 2011-August-16, 02:23, said:

EBU rules (which disallow weak-only multi except in a very high level competitions) is:-
1) weak 2 in either major
2) Acol 2 with solid diamonds

Very high level competition? A weak-only multi is allowed at level 4 -- nearly all tournaments are level 4. At the club level it varies -- the largest club in London allows only simple system; at the second-largest club virtually anything goes, though you may have to submit your strong-pass system in advance.

[phil_20686]

I was convinced having a strong option of any type in your multi is a big loser: This pair of hands occured on consecutive boards in beijing when I was watching my teammies:

---

---

Off in 4H when oppos brought back (a slightly fortunate) 6D, and then evidently chastened they failed to get inot this auction when a 2h-4H auction would likely have ended it.

No matter your multi-style, if you include strong balanced hands in your multi one of these things will happen, either partner will pre-empt your strong balanced, or partner will fail to preempt when he needs to and you will concede a (double) game swing.

PS: my memory of these hands is somewhat approximate. But they should illustrate the point anyway.

[phil_20686]

Vampyr, on 2011-August-25, 11:50, said:

Very high level competition? A weak-only multi is allowed at level 4 -- nearly all tournaments are level 4. At the club level it varies -- the largest club in London allows only simple system; at the second-largest club virtually anything goes, though you may have to submit your strong-pass system in advance.

I have played a weak only multi at county level tournaments and national tournaments and no one has ever questioned it. I am pretty sure that I did not even know that it was illegal. Who writes these regulations?

Can i not just get around having a strong option by making it 38-39 Bal? Always found those hands difficult to bid. All zero times that I have ever held one.

[Cyberyeti]

phil_20686, on 2011-August-25, 13:22, said:

I have played a weak only multi at county level tournaments and national tournaments and no one has ever questioned it. I am pretty sure that I did not even know that it was illegal. Who writes these regulations?

Can i not just get around having a strong option by making it 38-39 Bal? Always found those hands difficult to bid. All zero times that I have ever held one.

I believe they spotted this problem, and said the strong option has to have reasonable frequency.

And on both boards, your team mates bid badly and this convinces you that the strong option is bad.

On the first, I'd bid 3N playing my own system (values to raise 2N to 3, not enough to make slam, 4♥-4♠) treating that quality heart suit as a 4-4 rather than a 5-4, not the best contract but better than 4♥.

On the second, why was 2♥ bid rather than 2♠ or 3♥ or 3♠ ?

[gnasher]

phil_20686, on 2011-August-25, 13:22, said:

I have played a weak only multi at county level tournaments and national tournaments and no one has ever questioned it. I am pretty sure that I did not even know that it was illegal.

It's not illegal - as Vampyr said, it's allowed at nearly all English tournaments apart from some club games.

Quote

Who writes these regulations?

You'll find a list of them here:
http://www.ebu.co.uk...dEcommittee.htm
At least five of them post frequently on these forums.

[whereagles]

phil_20686, on 2011-August-25, 13:17, said:

I was convinced having a strong option of any type in your multi is a big loser: This pair of hands occured on consecutive boards in beijing when I was watching my teammies:

(...)

No matter your multi-style, if you include strong balanced hands in your multi one of these things will happen, either partner will pre-empt your strong balanced, or partner will fail to preempt when he needs to and you will concede a (double) game swing.

Phil, those hands were more a display of ineptitude from your teammates than multi's fault. When responder is weak, opener might be strong and vice-versa.

It is as simple as that and it's not resulting. It's technique.

By the way, I'm not a multi fanboy. But I obviously agree it's easier to keep it weak only. The main advantage I see to that style is that responder can tactically PASS the multi, leaving 4th seat in a lot of pressure.

[nige1]

whereagles, on 2011-August-25, 00:54, said:

huh...? how come 3♥ shows both a min and a max???

Duh Sorry. Attempting to adapt an old version with three options. Now think that's too many options. But I over-simplified
Over 2♦ - 2N (relay) - ??

• 3♣ = Minimum weak two in ♥ or strong 444 with black singleton. (Now 3♦ = relay,. 3♥ = to play opposite weak two in ♥)
• 3♦ = Minimum weak two in ♠ or strong 444 with.red singleton. (Now 3♥ = relay,. 3♠ = to play opposite weak two in ♠).
• 3♥/3♠ = Maximum. With unbid major. Effectively transfers.
• 3N = AKQxx or AKJxx of either major.

[FrancesHinden]

Zelandakh, on 2011-August-16, 02:23, said:

Most people I know play their multi as:-
1) weak 2 in either major
2) Acol 2 in either minor
3) either strong balanced or strong 3-suiter

Very few pairs add more than 5 hand types here. I think the Yeti is suggesting playing with 6 types (both of those in type 3) but not more. Even 6 is starting to push it imho.

A workaround for EBU rules (which disallow weak-only multi except in a very high level competitions) is:-
1) weak 2 in either major
2) Acol 2 with solid diamonds

This allows Responder to pass with any diamond figure in a weak hand since partner cannot have the strong variant. Playing on BBO there are no rules restricting the mini-multi which I personally think is much better than the traditional multi.

We play your 'workaround' and have continued to do so even after the restrictions on the multi were relaxed. It's actually quite a handy hand type to take out of the 1D opening.

[han]

I play that 2D is either weak with a major, GF with diamonds (and perhaps another suit) or balanced 24-25. I don't the strong balanced hands as a problem. My partner usually takes such a long time counting his points that I know whether he is weak or strong.

[phil_20686]

whereagles, on 2011-August-26, 01:49, said:

Phil, those hands were more a display of ineptitude from your teammates than multi's fault. When responder is weak, opener might be strong and vice-versa.

I dispute this. The problem is always that if you preempt, you might be preempting partner, and if you do not preempt, you might fail to preempt the opposition. Opposite a weak only multi you at least know what your objective is in the bidding. Obviously, teammies should have had one style and stick with it. Bidding 4H p/c opposite a multi with a strong option is not a long run loser imo, you just accept sometimes you hit partner with a balanced hand and no major. I would have bid 4H P/C with both of those hands. OTOH, you cannot getaway from the fact that you are either losing preemptive options, or you are allowing partner to preempt your strong options. All preempts work best when partner has a good fit and a weak hand. Oddly, those are exactly the times partner is most likely to be strong, so you are getting rid of your best hands if you dont preempt there.