[quiddity]

---

I don't have much experience playing against multi. We were using a defense where 2H is takeout of hearts and 3H is natural. Is this hand good enough for 3H immediately?

[JLOGIC]

Not a fan of your defense, imo one of the biggest weaknesses of playing multi is that when you have a weak 2 bid in spades they get to have a 2H overcall. That said, I would pass playing these methods, I would expect a better hand for a direct 3H overcall given that you will often be able to pass and bid 3H when it is safer. This might make me vulnerable to preemption, but only if LHO has some heart length (else he cannot preempt) which reduces the chance of me getting screwed.

[gnasher]

 JLOGIC, on 2012-March-12, 01:11, said:

Not a fan of your defense, imo one of the biggest weaknesses of playing multi is that when you have a weak 2 bid in spades they get to have a 2H overcall. That said, I would pass playing these methods, I would expect a better hand for a direct 3H overcall given that you will often be able to pass and bid 3H when it is safer. This might make me vulnerable to preemption, but only if LHO has some heart length (else he cannot preempt) which reduces the chance of me getting screwed.

I am a fan of this defence, for precisely the reason that Justin mentions: it's fairly safe to pass when you have a heart overcall, because LHO can't preempt. That gives you sequences like:

2♦ pass 2♥ pass
2♠ dbl              = hearts, semi-three-suited (5(43), 1633, etc)

2♦ pass 2♥ pass
2♠ 3m              = hearts plus a second suit

By contrast, it's not as safe to pass with a takeout double of hearts, because it may go

2♦ pass 2♠ pass
4♥

or

2♦ pass 4♥ pass
pass

which is a rather worse position to be in than after (2♠) dbl (4♠), where both partners get a chance to limit their hands.

[Fluffy]

I have played take out overcalls, and this hand is a clear pass IMO

[inquiry]

I like multi-versus-multi defense. I will repeat the details here (it has been posted on the forum several times).

The basic idea circles around the use of a double of 2♦ to have meanings almost identical to their opening 2♦ bid

Double shows one of these hands

• An opening bid with hearts
• An opening bid with spades
• strong balanced hand (range of 19 to 22 or so)
• very strong three suited hand (any three suits

2♥ shows strong notrump hand (15-18)
2♠ transfer to 3♣ (2nt by advancer shows values, but might pass a 3♣ rebid, direct 3♣ weak
2NT transfer to 3♦ (3♣ by advancer shows values, but might pass a 3♦ rebid, direct 3♦ weak
3♣ preemptive (not opening hand) with long clubs
3♦ preemptve (not opening hand) with long diamonds
3♥, 3♠, 3nt = natural and strong

To see the full scheme, it is good to take a look at chris ryall's mulit-versus-multi page (link to m-v-m). So on this hand, you would (or at least could) start with a m-v-m double since you have "an opening bid" in hearts.

[quiddity]

I passed and LHO.. passed! Partner had a 12-count with 6 diamonds and passed it out so we missed a game. LHO had a weak 2254.
This was mostly my fault; I didn't really look through the defense when we started the match so I had to ask for the printed defense. When I realized I couldn't bid 2H naturally and passed LHO knew what was going on. Possibly partner felt ethically bound to pass as well - does reading through the defense count as UI?
Even if there is no UI consideration, how hard should partner strain to keep this auction alive?

[JLOGIC]

 gnasher, on 2012-March-12, 06:37, said:

I am a fan of this defence, for precisely the reason that Justin mentions: it's fairly safe to pass when you have a heart overcall, because LHO can't preempt. That gives you sequences like:

2♦ pass 2♥ pass
2♠ dbl              = hearts, semi-three-suited (5(43), 1633, etc)

2♦ pass 2♥ pass
2♠ 3m              = hearts plus a second suit

By contrast, it's not as safe to pass with a takeout double of hearts, because it may go

2♦ pass 2♠ pass
4♥

or

2♦ pass 4♥ pass
pass

which is a rather worse position to be in than after (2♠) dbl (4♠), where both partners get a chance to limit their hands.

Interesting post, thanks. And you obviously have much more experience vs multi than I do so I would not be surprised at all if you were right.

[gnasher]

 JLOGIC, on 2012-March-12, 20:45, said:

Interesting post, thanks. And you obviously have much more experience vs multi than I do so I would not be surprised at all if you were right.

Before you go changing your methods, I should point out that I've haven't actually used this defence often enough to validate this theory. Almost everyone I play with prefers natural overcalls, double as a weak notrump or a very good hand, and pass-then-double as takeout.