What's your plan?

[pbleighton]

If we agree, I repeat if we can agree, and we may not, that:

 

1s and 3s rebid shows this playing strength but more hcp

and

1s and 2s rebid shows this hcp but promises less playing strength

 

Yes, I agree.

 

What should we do and why?

 

Open 4S, because it describes the hand, you don't have a rebid problem, and it shuts out your opponents.

 

Peter

[TimG]

I lean towards 1s and 2s rebid buying into the argument that working hcp is just as important as playing strength so we should go more conservative rather than aggressive.

High card points is an attempt at quantifying playing strength, a method to compare two different hands in a common unit of measurement.

 

If a hand obviously has more playing strength than this evaluation method comes up with, it doesn't seem right to stubbornly follow the evaluation method.

[awm]

I've been playing in the ACBL nationals here in Nashville, and have noticed a couple hands like this. It seems like most players here open 1♠ and rebid 4♠ with these hands, which seems kind of like an overbid to me.

 

These hands are tough because there are pretty good hands partner could have where game has no play whatsoever, as well as pretty poor hands where game is quite good. Try for example:

 

x

KQxx

Qxxx

Kxxx

 

xx

Axx

Kxxx

xxxx

 

It's a good hand for a precision-style 3♠ rebid (which has to show something like this) or using Gazilli to make the same distinction in a natural system. Without these gadgets I tend to open 1♠ and rebid 2♠ so as not to play partner for perfect cards.

 

In any case, the actual partner hand for this is not too relevant since all roads should lead to game:

 

xx

Axxxx

x

Axxxx

[mike777]

<!-- ONEHAND begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> Dealer: </td> <td> South </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Vul: </td> <td> None </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Scoring: </td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </span> </th> <td> AQJT965 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> 2 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> A8 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> 873 </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- ONEHAND end -->

 

You're the dealer at IMPs. What's your opening bid? If you open 1♠, partner responds 1NT (forcing): what's your plan from there?

Really great hand to post.

 

Forum posters are all over the place with this one.

 

I emailed it around and got responses such as:

 

1) open 4s

2) open 1s rebid 2s

3) open 1s rebid 3s

4) open 1s rebid 4s

 

they were all pretty sure their answer was pretty standard. :)

 

:)

[hrothgar]

It's a good hand for a precision-style 3♠ rebid (which has to show something like this) or using Gazilli to make the same distinction in a natural system. Without these gadgets I tend to open 1♠ and rebid 2♠ so as not to play partner for perfect cards.

Agree with AWM regarding the Gazilli comment. This hand is a lot easier if you have a gimmick like this available.

 

Where I disagree is whether this hand is a clear 3♠ rebid in the context of a strong club system. While this hand is clearly a non-minimum, its also far from a maximum. I'd certainly consider a 2♠ rebid even in the context of Precision or MOSCITO. (I'd definitely rebid 2♠ playing 2/1)

[cherdano]

I always bid 1S, then 4S, on these type of hands, which I have always understood as showing roughly a 4S opening plus a side ace, which is exactly what I have.