up the line

[sceptic]

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=s87hq6dat5caqj953&w=s9432hat94dqjck72&e=sa65hj8753d643ct8&s=skqjthk2dk9872c64]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

West North East South

 

 -     1♣    Pass  1♦

 Pass  2♣    Pass  3NT

 Pass  Pass  Pass  

 

would you bid 1 diamond here or 1 spade (sorry if this is old hat) but I would like the pros and cons

 

comments on the 3NT bid if you feel inclined, I did not like it but it worked well 3NT+1, I don't think the result was merited though

[pigpenz]

i would bid 1♦ then intending to rebid my major to show both my shape and strength. So question then becomes is it better to rebid your major or protect your honor in hearts for playing 3NT...if you bypass your major then you give up any chance at game or slam in your diamond suit.

[Al_U_Card]

The D bid, when holding the major, is best reserved for GF hands. In standard methods, reverses by responder are a GF. The "cloud factor" is also important as the opps may guess to lead the wrong major if you don't show it. So only reverse when you have no stopper in the unbid major so that pard will know to bid NT only if he has the other major stopped. (And this will right side the contract.)

[awm]

Agree with 1♦. There are several different ways to bid over 1♣:

 

(1) Bid four-card suits up the line, or longest suit first.

(2) Bid longest suit first, but prefer a major if 4M+4♦.

(3) Bid longest suit first with GF values, otherwise bid a major before diamonds.

(4) Bid longest suit first with inv+ values, but bid a major before diamonds if weak.

(5) Various transfer schemes (bidding 1♦ to show hearts, 1♥ to show spades, etc)

 

I'm not going to start a debate on which of these methods are best, but if we ignore (5), which is far from standard and requires a lot of discussion, you'll see that 1♦ is universal on your cards.

 

In general it is a good policy to bid your longest suit first so partner can accurately gauge your distribution. At least, this is a good policy when you're headed to game or slam (it's arguable whether it's right when you just want to get to the best partial as soon as possible).

 

After 1♣-1♦, opener will often bypass a four-card major to bid 1NT if playing styles (3) or (4). However, people usually don't bypass a four-card major to bid 2♣, because followups tend to by more awkward and it's nice to pattern out on 6-4 hands (which often produce a light 5-minor game). So the odds of a spade fit after 1♣-1♦-2♣ are remote. 3NT seems like a good gamble -- maybe partner will have heart help, or runnable clubs, or enough diamond honors to run that suit. Obviously this can backfire, but going slow by bidding 2♠ over 2♣ can also backfire (by making the heart lead more obvious to the opponents).

[Guest Jlall]

1D is the bid in both walsh and up the line. Here is a very good general rule: with good hands bid your longest suit first. This rule has served me well.

[han]

Agree with Justin, I play Walsh (i.e. not up the line) and would bid 1D.

 

I see no reason to introduce spades over 2C, partner doesn't have 4 spades, and we know we want to play in notrump. I'd bid either 2NT or 3NT, depending on how sound or light my partner tends to open.

[Limey_p]

I don't think the result was merited though

 

You've bid a vulnerable game at imps that needs a finnesse plus a little more. No shame in that. I wouldn't want the contract to be anything else. If it makes, great, and if not you will not lose imps to the good players.

[barmar]

1D is the bid in both walsh and up the line. Here is a very good general rule: with good hands bid your longest suit first. This rule has served me well.

Another way to say this is: if your hand is only worth one bid, bid your major, otherwise bid up the line.

[mikeh]

Another way to say this is: if your hand is only worth one bid, bid your major, otherwise bid up the line.

This is accurate for traditional bidders, but wrong for walsh style bidders. Walsh style bidders bid 1♦ here ONLY if they have enough to force to game: that requires a lot more than just enough to bid twice :)

[barmar]

That depends on what your requirements are to bid twice. If your partnership agrees that a reverse by responder is only invitational, you don't need GF to bid up the line.

 

In my regular partnership, 1♣-1♦-1♥-2♥ shows an invitational hand with 4 ♥ and 4+ ♦. And opener is usually unbalanced or has a poor side doubleton that prevented him from rebidding NT.

[joshs]

That depends on what your requirements are to bid twice. If your partnership agrees that a reverse by responder is only invitational, you don't need GF to bid up the line.

 

In my regular partnership, 1♣-1♦-1♥-2♥ shows an invitational hand with 4 ♥ and 4+ ♦. And opener is usually unbalanced or has a poor side doubleton that prevented him from rebidding NT.

Thats a sequence where Walsh players have accidents with, if they haven't discussed it Some play it as 4 card raise, and therefore a strong hand. Others (like myself) prefer to use this bid to show 8-10 HCP, strong 3 card support, and the inability to bid NT. Probably a hand like xxx Axx KQxxx xx. Its otherwise an unbiddable hand.

[Badmonster]

That depends on what your requirements are to bid twice.  If your partnership agrees that a reverse by responder is only invitational, you don't need GF to bid up the line.

 

In my regular partnership, 1♣-1♦-1♥-2♥ shows an invitational hand with 4 ♥ and 4+ ♦.  And opener is usually unbalanced or has a poor side doubleton that prevented him from rebidding NT.

Thats a sequence where Walsh players have accidents with, if they haven't discussed it Some play it as 4 card raise, and therefore a strong hand. Others (like myself) prefer to use this bid to show 8-10 HCP, strong 3 card support, and the inability to bid NT. Probably a hand like xxx Axx KQxxx xx. Its otherwise an unbiddable hand.

How do you work out the huge difference in what that bid could mean? How do you handle this with a pick up partner? Do you really stop to discuss, or do you hold your breath, bid and hope you're on the same page?

[han]

Deb,

 

When playing with a pick-up partner, no matter how good, you just can't avoid an occasional misunderstanding. That is just something you accept.

 

You can keep the misunderstandings to a minimum by (1) making unambiguous bids (2) discussing general approach and (3) knowing where your partner is coming from.

 

This may mean that you just bid game instead of making a subtle invite or choice of games bid. It may also mean that you give up on slam when the odds seem low and you don't have the methods to find out.

 

Casual partnerships have done surprisingly well in major North American pair events.

[mike777]

That depends on what your requirements are to bid twice.  If your partnership agrees that a reverse by responder is only invitational, you don't need GF to bid up the line.

 

In my regular partnership, 1♣-1♦-1♥-2♥ shows an invitational hand with 4 ♥ and 4+ ♦.  And opener is usually unbalanced or has a poor side doubleton that prevented him from rebidding NT.

Thats a sequence where Walsh players have accidents with, if they haven't discussed it Some play it as 4 card raise, and therefore a strong hand. Others (like myself) prefer to use this bid to show 8-10 HCP, strong 3 card support, and the inability to bid NT. Probably a hand like xxx Axx KQxxx xx. Its otherwise an unbiddable hand.

hmm... It really seems this hand is too rare a problem hand to worry about, why not just rebid 1nt. Partner may rebid over our 1nt or 1nt may be the best spot since the opp are silent.

 

btw another pick up pair just won a Nat team event, Pam Granovetter and Barry Rigal, they had little discussion other than Barry saying I play "Pam's system".

[joshs]

That depends on what your requirements are to bid twice.  If your partnership agrees that a reverse by responder is only invitational, you don't need GF to bid up the line.

 

In my regular partnership, 1♣-1♦-1♥-2♥ shows an invitational hand with 4 ♥ and 4+ ♦.  And opener is usually unbalanced or has a poor side doubleton that prevented him from rebidding NT.

Thats a sequence where Walsh players have accidents with, if they haven't discussed it Some play it as 4 card raise, and therefore a strong hand. Others (like myself) prefer to use this bid to show 8-10 HCP, strong 3 card support, and the inability to bid NT. Probably a hand like xxx Axx KQxxx xx. Its otherwise an unbiddable hand.

How do you work out the huge difference in what that bid could mean? How do you handle this with a pick up partner? Do you really stop to discuss, or do you hold your breath, bid and hope you're on the same page?

The most practical answer is, without discussion you don't bid 2H with EITHER hand. Bid 1N on the hand that I wanted to bid 2H with (even though you just wrongsided NT), and bid 3H or 4H with the good hand and 4 hearts.

 

If partner tried this bid with me, I would treat it as the weak hand for the following reasons:

a. the bid "sounds" weak

b. he is expected to know there is some ambiguity, so would try not to give me a problem if there is a good alternative. The strong hands have lots of good alternatives (3H, 4H, 4'th suit forcing, splinters, etc.). The weak hand doesn't.

 

There is another similar auction. Playing Flannary, partner opens 1H, you bid 1S and partner bids 2S.

 

Is this:

a. A reverse: 4 spades and a hand too good for flannary?

b. did he forget about flannary?

c. is this a normal single raise with exactly 3 trumps?

 

The correct answer is suppossed to be c. Hopefully, partner is on the same wavelength. :P

[benlessard]

I see no reason to introduce spades over 2C, partner doesn't have 4 spades, and we know we want to play in notrump. I'd bid either 2NT or 3NT, depending on how sound or light my partner tends to open.

 

 

 

Playing Walsh its dangerous to bypass major when you are responder since partner will sometimes bypass his majors (even if he don't bid 1nt)

 

 

xxxx

x

Ax

AKJTxx

 

 

IMHO playing walsh the correct rebid for opener is 2♣ not 1♠

 

 

So with ♠KQJx partner could easily have 4s.

 

With your hand ill rebid 2♥ tactical or 2♠ natural ...bidding 3nt seems a non-neccessary slight gamble.

 

 

Ben

[barmar]

There is another similar auction. Playing Flannary, partner opens 1H, you bid 1S and partner bids 2S.

 

Is this:

a. A reverse: 4 spades and a hand too good for flannary?

b. did he forget about flannary?

c. is this a normal single raise with exactly 3 trumps?

 

The correct answer is suppossed to be c. Hopefully, partner is on the same wavelength. B)

I don't play Flannery, but c makes the most sense.

 

Flannery players don't usually bid a 4-card spade suit over an opening 1♥, since it's rare that opener has the too-strong hand. If opener has that hand, I assume his rebid is 3♠, 4♠, or a splinter if he's 4=5=3-1.

[luke warm]

xxxx

x

Ax

AKJTxx

 

 

IMHO playing walsh the correct rebid for opener is 2♣ not 1♠

 

 

So with ♠KQJx partner could easily have 4s.

 

With your hand ill rebid 2♥ tactical or 2♠ natural ...bidding 3nt seems a non-neccessary slight gamble.

 

 

Ben

maybe so, but i'd bid 1S... and on wayne's hand, 3nt looked like the correct bid, to me...

[benlessard]

These are really specific and somewhat rare auction. So i dont think any method is better then the other.

 

 

But i know some expert players will bypass a 4 card majors with 6 solids clubs.

 

 

kqjx

kx

xxxx

xxx

 

 

xxxx

xx

a

AKJTxx

 

 

4S is better when played by north then played by south.

 

3nt is a poor contract.

 

 

So if you never rebid 2c with a 4M that is fine by me im just saying that to do otherwise is possible and that some do. So for responder its somewhat dangerous to bypass a 4M.

 

 

Ben

[luke warm]

kqjx

kx

xxxx

xxx

 

 

xxxx

xx

a

AKJTxx

with those hands, i'd expect north to respnd 1S to 1C.. in any case, your point is taken... i've learned never to say never, about bridge or most things in life

[keylime]

I like 1♦ as a starting point.

 

I don't play Walsh admittedly. We're pretty classic in approach. If pard rebids 2♣ then I think about things.