Two Club Openings

Two Club Openings - Follow-Up

Numerous follow-ups have been devised for auctions which start with a 2♣ opening bid. Here we outline the basics of just three of these methods, those most frequently encountered on the tournament circuit.

Control Responses (aka "Steps")

In this method, Responder shows his number of “controls” … in this context, a King counts as one control and an Ace counts as two controls. After 2♣, one commonly used set of Control Responses goes as follows:

2♦: 0-1 Controls (in other words … no Ace, maybe a King)

2♥: 2 Controls (an Ace or 2 Kings)

2♠: 3 Controls, but specifically an Ace and a King

2NT: 3 Controls, specifically 3 Kings (the responses are designed to get the holder of the 3 Kings to

be on play in a No Trump contract)

3♣: 4+ Controls.

This method (and other similar methods) of responding has the benefit of sometimes telling Opener right away whether slam is a possibility. But the method also suffers from a couple of serious disadvantages, which we can best explore through some examples. Suppose that you open 2♣ with this lovely collection:

♠ AQ

♥ AKT987

♦ K4

♣ AQJ

Partner makes the inconvenient response of 2♥, so he has the A♦ or else both missing Kings. This response has forced us to show our suit at the 3-level, and, additionally, if we end up playing this in Hearts, it’s going to be played from the wrong side. Here are 3 hands that Responder might have after that 2♣ 2♥, 3♥ start:

Hand A Hand B Hand C

♠ K6542 ♠ 642 ♠ 642

♥ 76 ♥ Q97 ♥ 7

♦ 872 ♦ AQ5 ♦ AQJT97

♣ K74 ♣ 9865 ♣ 865

With Hand A, what would be your choice? Raise to 4♥ on a small doubleton? Introduce the moderate Spade suit at the 3-level? An awkward choice, and even if Responder guesses right and bids 4♥ he’ll still be playing it from the wrong side.

With Hand B, Responder is slammish with Heart support, but has no convenient slam try available. What would 4♦ mean here? It would be convenient if that were a cue-bid with Heart support, but then what are you supposed to do with Hand C?

That covers the basics of Control Responses, but there is some hidden complexity in the method, especially what happens when they overcall or double 2♣. Also, what adjustments do you make to Blackwood after controls have been shown? To us, it sounds like a lot of complexity for a method that sometimes results in wrong-sided contracts and crowded auctions. But the method has many adherents, no reason to change if you like it!

2♦ as a Waiting Bid

There was a time when 2♦ was commonly used as a negative response to 2♣, and all other bids showed “positive values”, where positive was typically defined as showing an Ace and a King, or better. Nowadays, with the “waiting” method, 2♦ is used with all sorts of hands, some of them quite strong, the basic rule being that Responder bids 2♦ with most hands … to bypass 2♦ (and thereby to risk crowding the auction) Responder needs something well worth saying, such as a good suit and a good hand.

Just how good does the suit have to be? At least 5 cards, of course … and a good starting point for suit quality would be “2 or the top 3” … but with numerous exceptions as dictated by good judgment. Here are some examples … remember the recurring theme that we tend to avoid minor-oriented 2♣ openers, so much so that probably about 90% (perhaps more) of those 2♣ openers will be either No Trump or major-oriented hands.

♠ KQ972 Looks like an obvious 2♠ bid, eh? Showing a good hand a good

♥ 97 suit, what could be simpler? The auction to worry about here is

♦ A32 2♣ 2♠, 3♥. Now, Responder has no good bid! We’d suggest a

♣ 543 waiting bid of 2♦ here. If Partner rebids 2♥ we can try 2♠, and a

nice economical auction will ensue.

♠ 97 Same hand with the majors reversed. Now, 2♥ seems obvious, no

♥ KQ972 chance of preempting Partner here.

♦ A32

♣ 543

♠ KQ972 Here we have a 3^rd Heart, so our plan is to bid 2♠, showing a

♥ 543 good hand and a decent suit, and then, if Partner bids 3♥ we can

♦ A32 try 4♦, surely a cue-bid in support of Hearts.

♣ 97

♠ KQJ972 We’d bid 2♠ with this one, too. Then we would rebid 3♠ and leave

♥ 8 the rest up to Partner.

♦ 865

♣ 743

♠ 97 This is nowhere near a 3♦ bid, that suit is just not worth consuming

♥ A32 a whole round of bidding over, especially considering that it is a

♦ KQ972 minor. Even more to the point, in our opinion, Responder has no

♣ 543 satisfactory rebid if the auction goes 2♣ 3♦, 3♠.

There’s a school of thought which says that 2♦ is almost mandatory opposite a 2♣ opening … we wouldn’t quite go that far, but we would make sure that:

(a) when we make a positive response, we should have something worth saying;

(b) when we make a positive response, we should have already planned our rebid.

With a 2♦ “waiting bid”, Responder could hold all sorts of hand types, good or bad. The usual follow-up is for Responder to clarify his hand strength on his second bid by bidding the “cheaper minor”. Thus, 2♣ 2♦, 2♥ 3♣ is the aforesaid “cheaper minor” … it’s an artificial bid showing less than a King (or, perhaps, less than two Queens). Similarly, 2♣ 2♦, 3♣ 3♦. These sequences are the so-called “second negative”.

Immediate Second Negative

Using this method, after a 2♣ opening, 2♥ is used as an immediate “second negative”, the type of hand that might have got into the aforementioned 2♣ 2♦, 2♥ 3♣ auction. Thus, holding a decent hand with good Hearts, Responder bids 2NT as a surrogate for his 2♥ positive response.

This method suffers from defects similar to the Control Responses method (though to a lesser extent) … the contract might get wrong-sided when Responder bids 2♥ or 2NT … and the auction might get crowded if Opener is forced to introduce his major suit at the three-level.

Summary

We’ve only scratched the surface, there are many other (less popular) methods available. Each of the three that we have outlined above has its adherents, and also its benefits … our own preference is the “Waiting” style, primarily for its simplicity and because it gives Opener the best chance of showing his major (if that’s what he has) at the two-level.

For examples of Two Club sequences from actual play, please follow this link to the Archives