Weak Two Follow-Up

 

Standard methods opposite a Weak Two include:

  - A raise to the three-level is preemptive

  - A new suit is forcing (many play it as constructive but non-forcing)

  - 2NT is artificial, usually trying for game (there are various flavors of this 2NT bid)

 

Perhaps not quite standard, but increasingly popular, is the use of 4♣ opposite a Weak Two as Roman Key Card Blackwood.

        

7th March, 2007                Board 4      Dealer West       Both Vul

 

 

Partner (supposedly) has 6 Hearts … we have 3 with no aspirations for game … this looks like a preemptive 3♥ to us, making them figure things out one level higher.

 

To realize the effectiveness of this 3♥ bid on this particular deal, let’s look at South’s hand:

            ♠ KJ75

            ♥ 65

            ♦ JT7

            ♣ KQJT

If we pass 2♥, and it is South’s turn to bid, she has an easy Takeout Double.  But when we give a little boost to 3♥ things are not so easy … if South passes, the opponents may have stolen the contract … if South doubles on those skimpy values, North is apt to take the partnership overboard.

 

 

12th July, 2006                  Board 11      Dealer South       None Vul

 

 

Opposite Partner's Weak Two, we don't have enough to even think about making game.  Does that mean we should pass?  Not necessarily.  We are at the 2-level, with a 9-card fit, against non-vulnerable opponents.  What are our chances of being allowed to play it at the 2-level?  Pretty slim, we'd say!  It's quite likely that East will find a way to get into the auction, and then we'll no doubt bid 3♠.  If that's the case, let's put the opponents under some pressure and bid 3♠ directly.  This bid is preemptive, of course, our only intention is to crowd the auction for our opponents.

 

On the actual hand, 3♠ is a spectacular success, pushing the opponents overboard into 4♥ doubled and a 500 penalty.  It won't always work that well!  A more likely scenario is that 3♠ will be the final contract, when they can make 4 of a minor ... over 2♠, they might well find that minor fit, over 3♠ they probably won't.

 

 

24th May, 2006                 Board 17      Dealer North       None Vul

 

 

Opposite that Weak Two, South is good enough to be thinking about slam, but she needs a suitable hand from Partner.  How best to investigate slam?  The options are:

(a)    Bid 2NT … if you play that 2NT asks for a feature then 2NT here is not particularly useful, especially if Partner denies a feature … if you play that 2NT is some type of Ogust bid, you’ll be a bit better off, at least Partner will be able to express an opinion about her hand;

(b)   Bid 3♣ … even if you play this as natural and forcing, it doesn’t seem like a particularly useful solution to the problem … the hand will no doubt be played in Spades and 3♣ seems to be heading out in the wrong direction;

(c)    Roman Key Card … yes, that would be our choice, our plan is simple (though not foolproof!) … if Partner shows up with the two missing Key Cards, we’ll go to slam, otherwise we’ll subside in game … and we’ll miss those slams where North has a one Key Card perfecto, such as K♥ and a singleton Diamond.  But there is a caveat, see below.

 

After a Weak Two opening, it’s a good idea to play 4♣ as Roman Key Card, giving the partnership a chance to stay at the 4-level when the Weak Two bidder makes his customary disappointing Key Card response.  Here, this gadget works like an absolute charm … over 4♣, North shows just one Key Card, and the final contract is the safe 4♠, and not the perilous 5♠.

 

 

14th June, 2006                 Board 21      Dealer North      N-S Vul

 

 

This is a hand where you will want to try 4♥ or 4♠, it's simply a matter of getting to the best suit.  If your partnership is fairly disciplined about suit quality when opening a Weak Two, you might as well just bash out 4♠, and forget about the Heart suit.  But if you open Weak Twos with extremely ratty suits (even when vulnerable), you may want to try a (forcing) 3♥ first, planning to bid 4♠ next, unless Partner shows interest in Hearts.

 

The various methods for following up Weak Two openings are discussed in the System Library.

 

 

29th November, 2006       Boards 3, 29, 21, 32

 

 This week we had four instances where a Weak Two was opened opposite a hand with some values and adequate trump support, and in each case the question was whether or not to invite game.  We’ll assume that the partnership methods are that 2NT is some kind of inquiry (perhaps Ogust or Feature, it doesn’t matter which), and that raising the Weak Two suit to the three-level is merely furthering the preempt.

 

Before we look at the 4 hands, let’s remind ourselves that, opposite a Weak Two, the key factor in whether or not to invite (or bid) game is controls.  If we count an Ace as two controls and a King as one control, then the usual minimum for inviting is 4, and even that is marginal.  We can also count side-suit shortness in with our controls (one for a singleton, two for a void), but in that case we need adequate trump length (at least three) if we are to score some ruffs in Dummy.

 

Board 29         ♠ Q96

                        ♥ A432

                        ♦ A52

                        ♣ QT4

Partner opens 2♥.  We have 4 controls, but not much else.  Those 4 trumps are something of an illusion, because there are no ruffing values.  And at least one of those Queens will be wasted.  Give Partner KQxxxx of Hearts and an outside Ace, for example.  That’s a pretty good Weak Two, but probably not enough to make game opposite our hand … we can count 6 trumps, our A♦, and Partner’s Ace for 8 tricks … perhaps our Queen opposite Partner’s side-suit Ace will work together for a 9^th trick, but that’s likely to be all she wrote.  Game is definitely a long shot on this one.  Does that mean we should pass with this one?  No, we have a 10-card fit, it’s inconceivable that the opponents will let us play this at the two-level.  So, we must raise to 3♥, making it that much more difficult for the opponents to get into the auction.

 

Board 3           ♠ 942

                        ♥ AQJ4

                        ♦ KT85

                        ♣ K7

Partner opens 2♠.  We have 4 controls and a couple of plus factors.  There’s the potential for extra Heart tricks, and the possibility of a Club ruff.  We’d say that this one is just about worth an invitation.

 

Board 32         ♠ Q9

                        ♥ KQT84

                        ♦ Q2

                        ♣ KQ74

Partner opens 2♠.  Lots of points but only two controls.  Perhaps we can add one on for the Q♠, but those three side-suit Queens will not achieve much for Partner.  How much better our hand would be if two of those Queens were combined into a single Ace, giving us:

            ♠ Q9  ♥ KQT84  ♦ A2  ♣ K974

This hand would be an easy invite, with adequate controls and two working Queens.  But, back to the original hand.  If we are not going to invite, should we at least further the preempt with a 3♠ bid?  We wouldn’t.  We only have an 8-card fit, no need to venture to the 3-level voluntarily.  And as our side probably has the majority of the points, there’s a good chance that the opponents won’t be able to get into the auction even if we pass.

 

Board 31         ♠ K9

                        ♥ A9642

                        ♦ KT9

                        ♣ KJ8

Partner opens 2♠.  We have 5 controls and a clear invitation.  Can we make it an absolute rule that we’ll always invite (at least) when we have 5 controls?  Here’s the worst 5-control hand we can think of:

            ♠ 32  ♥ AK2  ♦ K432  ♣ K432

Well, inviting with that would be a stretch, we have to subtract something for the small doubleton in trumps.  So let’s just say that we almost always invite with 5 controls!

 

 

13th December, 2006        Board 5      Dealer North       N-S Vul

 

 

South’s 4♣ was Leaping Michaels, showing Clubs and Spades, typically 5-5 with a good hand.  White against Red, sooner or later, we must surely be prepared to bid to 5♥ at least, and it’s not inconceivable that the opponents have slam and a 7♥ sacrifice will be profitable.  It’s not possible to know for sure how many Hearts should be bid by E-W, but one thing we do know is that we should get there quickly.  Our own choice would be to bid 5♥ here, though 6♥ is somewhat tempting.

 

The important thing here is not to bid 4♥, then 5♥, this gives the opponents too much space.  On the actual deal North had a poor hand but 5-card Spade support … if we bid only 4♥ she can bid 4♠ and then can leave things up to Partner … if we bid 5♥ directly, she will be loath to pass with such good Spade support and will no doubt stretch to bid 5♠, getting her side too high. 

 

 

30th May, 2007                 Board 14      Dealer East       None Vul

 

 

Generally speaking, when Partner opens with a Weak Two and we have 4-card support, we go to the 4-level.  Either it’s being bid to make, or else it’s likely to prove a good sacrifice.  But this hand looks to us to be an exception.  West does not have enough for game to make, he has a smattering of defense, and he has a square shape which gives his hand less offense than he would like (no ruffing values).  So, we’d bid just 3♠ here, and that turns out to be the winning call.  Both sides can make 9 tricks in their major suit fit, and bidding 4♠ just gets an avoidable minus score.

 

 

November 21st, 2007        Board 27      Dealer South       None Vul

 

 

In this situation, holding 3-card support for Partner’s Weak Two suit, but without enough for game, it’s usually a good idea to go directly to our “total trick level” with a bid of 3♥, a little bump in the auction to make the opponents’ life more difficult.  That’s all very well, but do we really want a Heart lead against East’s Spade contract?  No, of course not, and the solution is to play something called McCabe which allows us to bid 3♦ here, saying “I have a 3♥ bid, but I actually want a Diamond lead”

 

A nice gadget, but suppose that you hold:

            ♠ 765

            ♥ --

            ♦ QJ97654

            ♣ 542

Feeling a sense of impending doom, after 2♥ by Partner, doubled on your right, you would love to escape into 3♦.  But if 3♦ is merely lead-directing, you’ll be in an even bigger hole when Partner corrects to 3♥.  The McCabe solution is to bid 2NT, telling Partner to bid 3♣, as you are short in Hearts and are trying to get out at the 3-level in another suit.

 

 

© BES, Inc

All Rights Reserved