[pstansbu]

Seeing an increasing number of players using a Multi 2 (usually diamonds and occasionally clubs) I have been looking into various defences as the only tool for me currently is Leaping Michaels. I like the look of multi vs. multi but that is relatively complex for what remains a rare occurrence. I then had the idea of just reusing our own multi 2d and related 2 level bids (Muiderberg/Woo and UNT style minors)- but resizing them (for strength) without reshaping them. This would virtually eliminate misunderstandings and forgetfulness. However the fact I haven't seen this suggested anywhere concerns me - so was wondering what people think the drawbacks are.

Assume they open a Multi 2♦ which is standard 3 way (weak 2 in Major, strong NT and strong 4-4-4-1 or at least not a mini Multi). The assumption would be that this will mostly be a weak 2 and if it's a strong option the likelihood of holding an opening hand is very low (at some point this won't hold and we could find ourselves declaring something awful and doubled, but on occasions that's a fair price to pay). Therefore the multi becomes:

• X = Multi
  
  • 6 card Major - opening hand
    
  • NT opener - 20-22 - something to stop Majors
    
  • 4-4-4-1 hand 16+ (could be 5-4-4-0)
• 2♥/ ♠ - 5 in the bid Major and 4+ in unspecified minor - opening hand
  
• 2NT - 5-5 in the minors - opening hand

So basically turned the weak options into stronger ones.

Next assumption - LHO will bid 2♥ so our continuations barely change

• pass - I would have bid 2H - nothing much to say - 0-9?
  
• 2NT - asking bid - 9+
  
• X - I have hearts - I haven't thought this through vs showing shortness in hearts, but for ease of remembering we use doubles of artificial bids as lead directing / showing that suit so this is simple.

LHO could pass so more bids available

• pass - I have diamonds and values
  
• 2♥ - not much to say pass or correct
  
• 2♠ - invitational in hearts
  
• 2NT - asking 9+

Against a Multi 2♣ (e.g. showing an Acol strong 2 in any suit, weak 2 in diamonds, a strong balanced hand) the odds change slightly but I imagine the weak 2 is still most likely (assuming the strong balanced is top end. So I think the only things that change are:

• You bid 2♦ for the Multi
  
• LHO might double and partner mustn't forget they probably have a weak 2 in ♦ if passing

This also leaves other options open - e.g. Leaping Michaels and delayed bidding options where you have a takeout of spades (or diamonds in the latter case) that doesn't much the hand patterns - you know you'll gat a chance for a takeout double when the bidding comes back around. There are still some hand patterns missing (e.g. weak and strong NT hands, takeout of hearts) but I'd rather miss these out to get the bidding right than include them and get the bidding wrong.

[helene_t]

so you have to pass with a balanced 19 count? what do you do with a muiderberg hand too strong for 2M?

[pstansbu]

helene_t, on 2017-January-14, 09:15, said:

so you have to pass with a balanced 19 count? what do you do with a muiderberg hand too strong for 2M?

As posted yes

The balanced hands are bothering me - 15-18 and 19 as you say. One thought was to keep 2NT more traditional as, say 15-18 with a stop and then you either upgrade of downgrade the odd 19 count. I'm rubbish at combined probabilities so haven't worked out probability of this balanced type hand vs the 5-5mm hand. I suspect the balanced hand is more likely.

You could then use the immediate / delayed approach to bidding with the balanced option. Bid 2NT immediately with both Majors stopped, otherwise wait for the bidding to come around and see if you have a stop (edited to take out my silly point about bidding with only hearts stopped - that doesn't work)

This defeats the complete consistency but it's not an artificial bid to rack your brains over.

I hadn't thought of an upper limit for the Muiderberg - what strength do you see as the challenge? I'm guessing something like 16+ when partner might pass you out with < 9 but game is on etc. This is the auction when responder is most likely to pass - they might make a "stolen bid" double but would probably pass - as opposed to the 2♦ doubled where I suspect a bid is more likely.

[nullve]

It's tempting to assume that Responder will woodenly bid something no matter what your intervening pass means. (And what does it mean, exactly?) But if you systemically pass with many strong hands, including 13-19 bal., then you might encounter Responders who will often convert the Multi into a fert. Then what would you play over (2♦)-P-(P)?

[Kungsgeten]

I know some that play a jump to 3M as 4 card major and 6+ minor. Regarding the structure I think it could work, but I would use direct 2NT as (16)17-19 and delayed 2NT as minors.

[pstansbu]

nullve, on 2017-January-14, 14:10, said:

It's tempting to assume that Responder will woodenly bid something no matter what your intervening pass means. (And what does it mean, exactly?) But if you systemically pass with many strong hands, including 13-19 bal., then you might encounter Responders who will often convert the Multi into a fert. Then what would you play over (2♦)-P-(P)?

That hadn't even occurred to me

I assume by fert. you mean forcing pass as there isn't technically a fert. in that sequence.

If the pass includes the strong hands would this have to be alerted and would it even be allowed?

I thought regulations only cover a forcing pass by opener, but I'm happy to be corrected.

I hadn't thought of making the pass forcing - in both types of Multi I would have thought if the auction is passed out opponents are going to be in the wrong contract in nearly all cases and we're better off defending.

[Vampyr]

pstansbu, on 2017-January-15, 05:08, said:

I hadn't thought of making the pass forcing - in both types of Multi I would have thought if the auction is passed out opponents are going to be in the wrong contract in nearly all cases and we're better off defending.

Not really; you could have a game or slam.

[pstansbu]

I agree with those saying the balanced hands shouldn't be ignored and 2NT is the natural option - this also fits the desire for consistency, I'd usually play puppet stayman over a 2NT opener - this feels like a good option to use in this case too.

The remaining decision is therefore whether to use the delayed bid for the 5-5mm hands or the balanced hand. The advantage of bidding 5-5mm immediately and delaying the balanced hand is you will know their suit and the stopper position. The disadvantage is Responder will now know the long suit and being able to act more confidently. An immediate balanced overcall will leave Responder a bit more in the dark and having decide whether to bid on, guess the lead etc.

I reallise my earlier suggestion of bidding immediately with a heart stopper is a bit rubbish, a good chance they will pass the 2NT regardless and responder will be able to tell when they hold spades and lead this.

Does the uncertainty mean you can be a bit more liberal with you stops/lack of stops?