Notrump Rebids

[han]

I also don't agree with your statement that partner cannot have 5 spades for the negative double (Jxxxx x AQxx Qxx is a 2S bid for you?).

I didn't say partner can not have 5 spades as some definitive statement. His bid shows four exactly and that's what you will play him for, if he doubled with more than that it's not something you can concern yourself with.

Does it? My understanding is that the negative double shows 4+ spades and a hand unsuitable to bid 2S. I would also double with KQxxx xx Kxx xxx, and this is a fairly common hand type.

 

So if I'm doubling with 5 fairly frequently then it doesn't make much sense to say that it shows exactly 4.

 

I think this double is more similar to 1D-(1S)-Dbl (which is more frequently done with 5+ hearts) than to 1D-(1H)-Dbl (which shows exactly 4 in standard) or 1D-(3H)-Dbl (which shows the same strength as a 3S bid and therefore denies a decent spade suit).

 

What do you think Josh, do we play it the same way and are we just calling it differently, or do we really have a different understanding of what a standard negative double shows?

[jdonn]

I think you are searching hard for very unlikely examples since almost all hands with 5 spades worth acting can bid 2♠.

 

It is not analogous to 1♦ (1♠) DBL since there partner will make a rebid lower than your suit on all minimums and you can bid 2♥, so double is normal on a minimum with long hearts. On the given auction partner will always rebid higher than 2♠ so you won't just double on minimums with long spades.

[Fluffy]

I made the mistake of rebiding a similar hand with 1NT with ♠K as singleton.

 

I remeber 2♠ -2 was a cold zero, don't make those errors again, 2♣ rebid.

 

 

And I'd rather open 1♥ than 1♣ :) (and I play transfer walsh)

[foo]

I had an interesting discussion at Vugraph this morning with another player who shall remain nameless til later.

 

We watched a hand at Flame's match where Flame's opp opened 1♦ in 2nd position and after partner bid 1♠, opener rebid 1NT with:

 

♠4♥Q932♦AQ87♣K765

 

at Both Vul, IMPs

 

Debate ensued about the NT rebid with a stiff ♠.

 

We agreed that we would not have opened this hand but even if your hand is not sub-minimum, what would you rebid?

 

I think rebidding 1N or 2N with a stronger hand should guarantee a balanced hand. The exception for me would be a hand with a stiff A or K and no better rebid.  Am I out of touch here?

1= No less than Eric Rodwell has gone down in print as saying that most < 14 HCP =1444's should be passed.

 

2= As for the rebid, any bid after 1m-1♠;?? is a distortion on your part.

As Dorothy Hayden-Truscott used to say "Tell the least lie".

 

When you are dealt this hand, you "know" that CHO is going to respond 1S if you Open; and that if you pass and CHO can Open they're going to Open 1S.

So you best have a plan to deal with it.

 

Your realistic choices are

a= 1C-1S;1N

b= 1D-1S;1N

c= 1D-1S;2C

d= the possibility of pa-1S;1N (assuming 2/1 GF and a Forcing NT response)

 

Due to the difference in the quality of the minors (♦AQ87 vs ♣K7xx), ?if? I Open, I'd use plan "d" above.

EDIT: "Freudian slip" typo. "b" or "c" are my preferences if I open this; and I like "c" slightly better.

 

However, like many others here I do not like opening this hand and prefer to pass.

[han]

Foo, I think you meant you'd use plan "b" if you would open.

[rbforster]

One thing to remember is that the general 4441 shape is really really rare relative to almost all other shapes. In this sense, it doesn't much matter how you treat it since it's almost an exception more than anything else. Sure it makes sense to agree on a partnership style, but I think it's a little excessive to redesign your system around it. Heck you could open it 1♥ if you really want (at least you've got no more rebid problems), and now your 5 card major style will merely be a 99.5% (or whatever) 5 card ♥ style instead of a 100% 5 card majors. The 1444 shape might even be less likely than the odds your brain glitches and you pull the wrong opening when you should have bid 1♥...

 

If you rebid 1NT with this (1444) and frequently raise with balanced hand containing 3-card support then partner shouldn't often pull to 2S with a 5-card major.

I see your point, but I disagree about the "often pulling to 2♠" part. Of all the hands that opener will have on the 1♦-1♠-1NT sequence, even removing some of the 3 card balanced raises, balanced hands are a lot more likely. You've got 2443, 2344, and 2353 for sure, and in my style all of the 3343 hands and maybe half of the 3442, 3244, 3352, and 3253 shapes. The balanced hands are all considerably more likely and my rough estimate using a priori probabilities for the shapes is that partner's 1NT rebid will have

 

1♦-1♠-1NT How many ♠s by 1NT rebidder?

 

#♠s ~Prob Shapes

1    7%      1444

2    43%    2443,2344,2353; half of 3442,3244,3253,3352

3    50%    3343; half of 3442,3244,3253,3352

 

So even agreeing to rebid 1NT on 1444 you will still almost always want to pull with 5♠ and a weak hand. Sure it will suck every once in a while playing the 5-1, but playing all those 5-2 and 5-3 fits will more the compensate in the long run.

 

It's much more important for example to decide how to rebid hands with 5431 shape. Those with 4♦5♣s like 1345, 2245, and 3145 - these are about 2.5x the total frequency of the 1444 shape (ignoring conditioning the probabilities on partner's 1♠ reply). There are also hands with 4♥5♦ like 1453, 2452, 3451 to consider as well. If all of these hands with 1-2♠ are rebidding 1NT, now you might have enough probability to consider revamping your partner's rebid rules.

[jtfanclub]

Hmmmm...

 

I wonder if it's worth revamping so that all hands with a singleton in a major without 5 cards in the other major or 6 of a minor open 1 club, while most balanced hands open 1 diamond. This is for less than reversing strength, of course.

 

1-4-4-4 opens 1 club

(1-3)-(4-5) opens 1 club

(1-4)-(3-5) opens 1 club.

(2-3-3)-5 still opens a club.

(3-4)-2-4 still opens a club.

4-4-2-3 still opens a club

 

2-2-(4-5) opens 1 diamond

any 4333 opens 1 diamond

any 5332 with 5 diamonds opens 1 diamond

any 4432 with a 3 or 4 card diamond suit opens a diamond

 

 

I don't know how useful that would be...it would be nice to know after a 1 diamond opening which didn't end up having at least 6 diamonds that partner is balanced, and it seems easier to figure out what partner has, provided you don't care, say, where the 13th card in a 3334 is. And you never open a 'could be short'. Even so, may not be useful. Oh well.

[foo]

IMHO the advice about not going overboard in redesigning System to deal with the possibility that you might you have to rebid 1N with a stiff someplace is good advice.

 

In addition, IMHO the principle of "telling the least lie" means that =both= shape and value location should be considered when deciding what to Open and plan for a rebid.

Which means preplanned artificial schedules end up being too restrictive.

 

If you want more flexibility regarding this issue than SA or 2/1 usually allows, one possibility is to play 5 card Spade openings and 4 card Heart openings.

 

Please note that I'm not advocating or denigrating this option. Just presenting it for consideration.

[1eyedjack]

I made the mistake of rebiding a similar hand with 1NT with ♠K as singleton.

 

I remeber 2♠ -2 was a cold zero, don't make those errors again, 2♣ rebid.

 

 

And I'd rather open 1♥ than 1♣ :) (and I play transfer walsh)

I made the mistake once of letting one bad result dictate my system. Don't make those errors again.

 

I rebid 1NT knowing that there is a risk that partner may rebid 2S on an inappropriate occasion. When such an occasion arises it comes as no great surprise. If I rebid 2C there is also a risk that 1NT was the best spot.

[kenberg]

IF the only time 1N is rebid with a stiff is when opener is 1-4-4-4 then yes, there is something to be said for just hoping that it doesn't cause trouble when it arises. How about 1-4-5-3? Again there is a problem and again there seems to be two schools of thought: Rebidding 2D shows six, or at least a very good five, thus forcing 1N on a stiff (unless you get cute with your three card club suit), or else rebidding NT shows (maybe with the 1-4-4-4 exception) two spades so you are forced to bid 1D-1S-2D on some pretty crappy suits.

 

I have never found a way out of this and I seriously doubt that there is one. The old fashioned notion (apparently endorsed by Rodwell) that not all 12 or even 13 counts (and certainly not crummy 11 counts) have to be opened seems to me to have much merit. A few more highs can work wonders in coping with adversity.

 

From observation, it seems to me that the "rebid 1N on a stiff" option may well be the majority view of high level players (not counting artificial systems). But my experience is limited.

 

My own current policy is loose: If I hold a moderately good five card diamond suit I rebid it, if I hold a bad suit but a decent spade honor I rebid 1N, if I hold neither I sacrifice a virgin to the bridge gods and do something.

[awm]

Certainly it helps to have some flexibility. I think after 1♦-1♠, most of us rebid 1nt on:

 

K

AQxx

Jxxxx

Kxx

 

And most of us rebid 2♦ on:

 

x

Axxx

AKQT9

xxx

 

But these are extreme examples, where you have a singleton high honor in spades, or where the diamond suit is particularly awful or particularly strong. The interesting question is what to do with the more "run of the mill" cases like:

 

x

KJTx

AJ87x

Kxx

 

Your suit is not awful, but it's not "practically a six card suit." You don't have an honor in spades. What do you do? I think here we will see a difference of opinion, with some people bidding 1nt, some bidding 2♣, some bidding 2♦, and a few saying they would pass in first seat on this hand.

 

My point is that it helps partner to know what you typically do with these hands. If you rebid 1nt, partner might not want to correct to spades as freely on a bad five-carder (conditioned on partner having five spades, the chance of opener having singleton goes up a bit, and these spade suits don't play well opposite two small either). If you rebid 2♣, partner may want to bid over 2♣ a little more often than he otherwise would. If you bid 2♦, partner may want to try to avoid raising on doubleton honor. If you pass, partner needs to bid more aggressively over your passed-hand responses than he might otherwise.