5 losers, I think? The short answer is yes, but it's a serious stretch of the usual parameters for a weak two.
Even if it's considered too strong, you're still allowed to open it, it's just the disclosure that's a problem, quite possibly we're looking at weak - intermediate rather than weak, by blue book definitions.
I think the more interesting question is "Would you allow a properly disclosed Benji style 2C where the 8 playing trick option does not promise a strong hand if not clubs?"
@Jerseybean said:
I think the more interesting question is "Would you allow a properly disclosed Benji style 2C where the 8 playing trick option does not promise a strong hand if not clubs?"
If suits break there are 6H and 2D
Well, I might make them describe the 8 playing tricks as 6.5 but I think it's still legal.
I'm not sure 8 playing tricks is really an adequate description, there's a lot of variation in the possible interpretations.
As said above it is not a 4 loser hand. It is, however, stronger than the average weak 2. I can hear someone defending it by saying it is 5-9 with 6H! Would they open 2H with xx KJ9xxx Qxx xx? If yes then their partner is going to have an awful time judging. It is losing bridge IMO to open this 2H so I wouldn't object either on the basis of regulation or description. I'd be happy if they did, indeed, open it 2H. They would have to get used to +200 in a row of +650s 😁
Comments
5 losers, I think? The short answer is yes, but it's a serious stretch of the usual parameters for a weak two.
Even if it's considered too strong, you're still allowed to open it, it's just the disclosure that's a problem, quite possibly we're looking at weak - intermediate rather than weak, by blue book definitions.
Regulations allow natural 2bids on 5+ card suit
I think the more interesting question is "Would you allow a properly disclosed Benji style 2C where the 8 playing trick option does not promise a strong hand if not clubs?"
If suits break there are 6H and 2D
Well, I might make them describe the 8 playing tricks as 6.5 but I think it's still legal.
I'm not sure 8 playing tricks is really an adequate description, there's a lot of variation in the possible interpretations.
As said above it is not a 4 loser hand. It is, however, stronger than the average weak 2. I can hear someone defending it by saying it is 5-9 with 6H! Would they open 2H with xx KJ9xxx Qxx xx? If yes then their partner is going to have an awful time judging. It is losing bridge IMO to open this 2H so I wouldn't object either on the basis of regulation or description. I'd be happy if they did, indeed, open it 2H. They would have to get used to +200 in a row of +650s 😁
Its 5 Loser but sensible to adjust for 11 cards in two suits to 4 Losers imo.