Is walsh still walsh or is it standard

[Badmonster]

You're opener. You say 1c, partner replies 1d and you say ?

With [hv=s=sakt9haq9d87ct643]133|100|[/hv]

OR[hv=s=sakt9haq9d87ct643]133|100|[/hv]

[Guest Jlall]

I do not consider Walsh to be standard, so if I was playing with a pickup partner I would bid 1H with these hands unless we had agreed on walsh.

[Gerben42]

Ditto, except that I would bid 1♠ and not 1♥ on the first hand ;)

[Guest Jlall]

Ditto, except that I would bid 1♠ and not 1♥ on the first hand :)

lol, you know what I meant ;)

[mikeh]

Justin is correct (again.... ;) )

 

What you rebid on these hands is essentially a question of partnership agreement. There is no absolute 'right' way: only a choice of agreements, with the 'correct' way being to play according to those agreements.

 

I am very much opposed to up the line bidding, but I would bid up the line if playing with an unknown partner with who I have had no discussion. If playing in any of my established partnerships, I rebid 1N with both.

[MickyB]

I would have bid my major playing SAYC and 1NT playing 2/1 GF. Sounds from the posts above that maybe I overestimate the number of 2/1ers who play Walsh.

 

I vote that we make transfer responses to 1♣ our standard, then it is obvious what to bid ;)

[Finch]

Except that you then have to define continuations. I know of two distinct and fully thought-out schemes, totally different, and I'm sure there are more.

[mike777]

I always assume Walsh/game force style in my no discussion, no agreements pick up partnerships. Surprisingly this is usually the least of our bidding issues.

[han]

I bid 1NT without discussion when I agreed to play 2/1. I'm not sure what BBO advanced says, it would be worthwhile to look at it.

[pclayton]

If I'm playing more than 10 boards with someone, I'll bring this up.

 

I don't consider either a 1♥ or a 1N rebid (with the subject hand) "standard", any more than I consider 1♣ - 1♦ as denying a 4 card major if less than an opening bid as "standard".

 

They are both playable methods and if you were to ask a random sample of experts in different parts of the country, or the world for that matter, I would expect a lot of different answers.

 

Southern California is Walsh country, especially with the older players, so a 1N rebid with both hands would be pretty common.

[awm]

If I agreed to play "standard" or "sayc" then I would assume no Walsh.

 

If I agreed to play "2/1" or "BWS" then I would assume Walsh.

 

Of course, it is perfectly possible to play "standard with Walsh" or "2/1 without Walsh" but my impression is that these are the more likely scenarios.

[joshs]

If I agreed to play "standard" or "sayc" then I would assume no Walsh.

 

If I agreed to play "2/1" or "BWS" then I would assume Walsh.

 

Of course, it is perfectly possible to play "standard with Walsh" or "2/1 without Walsh" but my impression is that these are the more likely scenarios.

Is Walsh really part of BWS? I might have missed that change. I am pretty sure BWS style is:

1M over 1C with 4D and 4 in M and less than a game invite. With longer diamonds, or 9+/10+ points you bid 1D. Opener, consequently, does not normally bypass majors to rebid 1N (except maybe on a 4333 hand?).

[MickyB]

Yup, that is still the case Josh. Opener only bypasses a 4 card major if 4333.

[pclayton]

And BWS is a semiforcing NT too, with Lawrence influences.

[pigpenz]

so in walsh is

1nt 8-10hcp

and 1♦ is either weaker or promises another bid.

 

so if i were playing walsh i would bid 1nt, not playing that with someone who was a pickup i would bid a 4 card major over 1♦

[Badmonster]

Is it standard for most 2/1 players?

[joshs]

so in walsh is

1nt 8-10hcp

and 1♦ is either weaker or promises another bid.

 

so if i were playing walsh i would bid 1nt, not playing that with someone who was a pickup i would bid a 4 card major over 1♦

I wouldn't quite say that. If you hold xxx xx KQJxx Kxx its normal to bid 1D over 1C and let partner declarer NT. I am also not positive if the 1C-1N as 8-10 is std walsh or not. I think its just an optional add on that can be played with walsh or std.

[AceOfHeart]

i hate to sound beginner, but what is walsh?

[Guest Jlall]

i hate to sound beginner, but what is walsh?

Basically a style where you bypass diamonds in all weak hands after a 1C opener to bid a 4 card major. Thus over a 1D response opener will also bypass a major suit to rebid 1N with a balanced hand since if partner has a 4 card major he will bid again over 1N since he has a good hand, so you will find your fit.

[ArcLight]

>Basically a style where you bypass diamonds in all weak hands after a 1C opener to bid a 4 card major.

 

What is the strength cut off? At what point would you respond 1♦ rather than 1 ♥/♠?

[Sigi_BC84]

>Basically a style where you bypass diamonds in all weak hands after a 1C opener to bid a 4 card major.

 

What is the strength cut off?  At what point would you respond 1♦ rather than 1 ♥/♠?

Playing SAYC: we respond 1♦ with (5)6-7 and 1NT with 8-9 when balanced and holding no 4M. When holding a major and diamonds, we always respond in the major unless we have enough values to reverse into the major over openers rebid.

 

So the cutoff should be GF values (12 points or so, depending on how sound your openers are) as a reverse into the major is forcing to game in SAYC.

 

I don't know the implications for 2/1.

 

--Sigi

[joshs]

>Basically a style where you bypass diamonds in all weak hands after a 1C opener to bid a 4 card major.

 

What is the strength cut off? At what point would you respond 1♦ rather than 1 ♥/♠?

There are two main versions:

Traditional Walsh: You bypass 1D unless the hand is game forcing

INV Walsh: You bypass 1D unless the hand is INV+ (about 10+ HCP)

 

Without discussion, if you are playing walsh its the GFing version, especially if your partner is from the west coast. On the east coast, INV walsh has some popularity, but BWS style is more common (you are allowed to bypass 1D to bid a major on 4-4 hands but the 1D bid doesn't "deny" a major so opener usually shows one even with a balanced hand).

 

Finally, if you are going to play Walsh style, you don't bid 1D over 1C very often. Consequently, it becomes more efficient to play transfer walsh:

Over 1C, have 1D show Hearts, 1H show Spades, and 1S show a 1D response. This creates more sequences for the common auctions where responder shows a major over 1C since you have an extra bid available (complete the x-fer at the 1 level). This has gotten popular over the last 3 years (I have been playing this for about 6 years and quite like it). But this treatment is still very non-standard.

 

Note: What I like about walsh is not the fact that you quickly find major suit fits. That part has pluses and minuses. The minus occurs when you have to bid 1H over 1C with xx xxxx AKQxx xx and partner raises you on Axx Qxx xx AQxxx (which many walsh players don't do) or Axx Qxx x AQxxxx which walsh player do raise you on.

 

The plus is that opener can rebid 1N immedialtely to show a balanced hand. That makes the rest of the auction, and hand evaluation easier, since you know you are facing at least 2 cards in every suit.

 

Have you ever had the auction:

AQxx xxx Kx Kxxx

Kx xxx AQxxx AQx

1C-1D-1S-2H(4'th suit forcing)-? What exactly is opener suppossed to rebid now??? And how do you get to 3N? Its so much easier if opener rebids 1N over 1D...

[mike777]

As a side note this is why walsh (g/f) players often play 2 way checkback or xyz.

 

assume you have an invite hand with 4 card major and 6 card D suit.

 

then:

 

1c=1h

1nt=2c is invite checkback, now you can later bid 3d as responder to show the 4 card h and 6 card d suit. example

1c=1h

1nt=2c

2d=3d

 

Note there are other hand types where you may not be able to show 4 card major and 6 card minor invite assuming 2/1 100% game force. In this case you must just choose to live with this system hole.

1h=1s

2c=?

Here your options often are to bid 2d 4sf game force(overbid) or 2nt as a strong invite or 3d as weakish and to play.

[joshs]

As a side note this is why walsh (g/f) players often play 2 way checkback or xyz.

 

assume you have an invite hand with 4 card major and 6 card D suit.

 

then:

 

1c=1h

1nt=2c is invite checkback, now you can later bid 3d as responder to show the 4 card h and 6 card d suit. example

1c=1h

1nt=2c

2d=3d

 

Note there are other hand types where you may not be able to show 4 card major and 6 card minor invite assuming 2/1 100% game force. In this case you must just choose to live with this system hole.

1h=1s

2c=?

Here your options often are to bid 2d 4sf game force(overbid) or 2nt as a strong invite or 3d as weakish and to play.

And furthermore you can play in 2D with 4M and 6D via:

1C-1M-1N-2C(forces 2D)-2D-P

Playing new minor forcing you can't get back to diamonds.

 

And yes, as Mike mentioned 4M 6m hands with less than GFing values are really a problem in 2/1. They are also a problem in standard if less than INV. In general, with strong hands in any system you will be able to make many bids and get to the correct strain. With weaker hands, you need to guess better.

[han]

Agree with Mike777 that 2-way checkback (or XYZ) is a big help when playing Walsh.