Rebid problem

[the hog]

If I opened 1C, I would now rebid 2C. This hand is not goo enough to reverse to 2D. AWM totally misses the point. A reverse shows a hand which is good enough not just to force to the three levl, but also to designate a particular point count. This hand does not fit thebill.

 

I would be close to a 5C opening on this; I agree with Richard.

[HeartA]

Take AQx KJxx x AJxxx

 

You open 1♣, partner bids 1♠. Do you reverse? Assume the 'x's are deuce-equivalents. If you'd reverse and think nothing of it, you are a member of the light reverse school.... and this is a great hand on which to belong to that school. If you

would either not reverse or you'd do it, hating the need to overbid this way, you're either a member of the strong reverse school or you'd like an application form.

 

Don't ask me what I'd bid with this hand: one of the benefits of being a charter member of the strong reverse school is that you never hold these hands B)

I belong the strong reverse group. But I would consider rebidding 2H when pd respond 1S since I have a fit. If pd responds 1D, I would rebid 1H.

[mike777]

If I opened 1C, I would now rebid 2C. This hand is not goo enough to reverse to 2D. AWM totally misses the point. A reverse shows a hand which is good enough not just to force to the three levl, but also to designate a particular point count. This hand does not fit thebill.

 

I would be close to a 5C opening on this; I agree with Richard.

much much closer to 5c opener than 2c rebid assuming no roth/stone

[hrothgar]

It occured to me that looking at the 7-4 hand patterns might be an interesting application for Bridge Browser. More specifically

 

1. Find the set of all hands with 7-4 hand patterns that get to choose an opening bid.

 

2. Identify strain and level. How often to people play a contract other than their seven card suit? How often do they defend? How often are they able to buy the contract at a low level?

 

3. Look at hands where open chose to open at the one level. Identify the frequency of competitive auction.

[inquiry]

Looking for 74 opening hands with bridgebrowser is trivial, and discovering contested versus uncontested auctions is also fairly painless. With the plotting routines, it is also dirt easy to tell if you played in yoru seven card suit or not. Just not sure what the criteria for determining the right bid is? There are many different 74 type hands.

[hrothgar]

Looking for 74 opening hands with bridgebrowser is trivial, and discovering contested versus uncontested auctions is also fairly painless. With the plotting routines, it is also dirt easy to tell if you played in yoru seven card suit or not. Just not sure what the criteria for determining the right bid is? There are many different 74 type hands.

Hi Ben

 

If I had to establish a rule set for hands where I'd chose to open 4M or 5m with a 7 card suit it would be something like the following:

 

1. Suit quality for the seven card suit. 8765432 looks much more like a 6 card suit than a seven carder. Ideally, I'd like HHxxxxx of better in the suit, but I'll settle for Q98xxxx, KTxxxxx or better.

 

2. There are limits to everything. If I have a suitable hand with really good prospects on offense and defense, I'll sometime prefer to open at the one level.

 

Ax

KQT3

---

AQJxxxx

 

If possible, lets constrain the bids based on suit quality on the low end and eliminate all hands with 17+ HCP on the high end

[whereagles]

If I have a suitable hand with really good prospects on offense and defense, I'll sometime prefer to open at the one level.

 

A

KQT3

Kxx

AQJxxxx

Hum.. a 1-4-3-7? Which game are you playing? :)

[hrothgar]

If I have a suitable hand with really good prospects on offense and defense, I'll sometime prefer to open at the one level.

 

A

KQT3

Kxx

AQJxxxx

Hum.. a 1-4-3-7? Which game are you playing? :P

Wow...

 

I'm often bad at proofreading, spelling, and the like but this is bad even for me

I corrected the original hand

[helene_t]

I think I'll rebid 2♣, allthough it's close. 3♣ would be the most best describing bid in the school I was brought up with, but I don't really like the idea that 2♦ has a lower lower-limit than has 2♦. 3♣ ought to be very well defined, especially if/since it's not forcing.

 

I know my hand will probably turn out to be worth (much) more than this bid suggests. But it's easier to show extra values than to show less values later on in the auction. The silence of the opps shows that we have a misfit (to the extent that a misfit is possible with this shape) and/or that p has a monster. If he jumps to 3NT now (which is quite likely) I will rebid 4♦ and probably insist on slam.

 

Btw, I would probably have opened 5♣ allthough that's close, too.