Fluffy Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 ♠AK52♥KQ84♦-♣AQ962 S - N1♣-1♦?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 1♥? isn't that 101% standard? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerben42 Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 Well one could bid 2♥ also, you know... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 I would say, start with 1♥ if you're strong enough to reverse into 2♠ next round, otherwise 1♠. But many ps and opps think I'm crazy. I suppose, in this case, it depends if p can bid 1♠ naturally with a minimum over 1♥. I don't like that but it seems to be standard, at least for those who don't play Walsh. I think this hand is a tad weak for a 2♠ in 3rd round so I voted 1♠ but I should probably just adhere to local customs and bid 1♥, which I expect to be the majority vote. Edit: sr miscounted the HCPs, 1♥ it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 I could, if I had an ace more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 Hi, You did not state it, so I assume no Walsh. 1H, although the hand is certainly strongenough to force to game, i.e. 2H is an option, but the advantage of 1H vs. 2H is, that partner can bid 1S naturally.1S and 2S kill the heart suit. The problem with bidding spades followed by hearts is, that it is not natural anymore, it is 4th suit. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 The problem with bidding spades followed by hearts is, that it is not natural anymore, it is 4th suit. Standard is 4th suit by opener = natural. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillHiggin Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 (edited) 1♥In a Walsh context, some agreement is needed about this, and style may depend on your checkback methods.My preference (which carries influence rating of around 0.01%) involves full xyz checkback and a soft definition of 1♠ here (IMP scoring only) - opener bids 1♠ with 4 when his hand is more suit oriented, but not necessarily unbalanced (values are "aces and spaces"). I prefer the jump to 2♥ to show the one bid problem hand - 5♠-4♥ and less than invite strength. I would definitely expect a ♦ rebid by opener to deny 4♠. Oops - misread the auction! Edited October 19, 2007 by BillHiggin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 I am bidding 2♥. This hand is strong enough to insist on game. I suspect that there are hands on which my pard might pass a 1♥ rebid and we are cold for either 4♥, 4♠ or 3NT. There are also hands on which no game will make, as we have no fit and no tricks, but I am not catering to that possibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 1♥, what is this problem even doing here? 2♥ at least I know what the person is thinking, 1♠ I don't. Art you really think that if partner passes 1♥ (which would be some 5-6 count) and his first response is in your void that you are missing game? I guess anything is possible but I seriously doubt it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 Obvious 1♥. With three suits you keep the bidding low as long as you can to make it easy to bid your suits naturally and find a fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 1♥, what is this problem even doing here? 2♥ at least I know what the person is thinking, 1♠ I don't. Art you really think that if partner passes 1♥ (which would be some 5-6 count) and his first response is in your void that you are missing game? I guess anything is possible but I seriously doubt it. [hv=s=sqxhxxxxdjxxxxcjx]133|100|[/hv] Do you expect your partner to take a call over a 1♥ rebid? I don't. 4♥ should be a claim. And, if you think that hand will bid over 1♥, how about this one: [hv=s=sqxhxxxxdjxxxxcjx]133|100|[/hv] Yes, he might have responded 1♠ on these cards. And many would (if they don't pass the 1♣ opening). But 4S will be a claim on this hand. Even this hand: [hv=s=sqxhxxxxdjxxxxcjx]133|100|[/hv] has a lot of play for 4S. And many would respond 1♦ and pass out 1♥. There is a lot to be said for bidding only 1♥. But it has risks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 1 or 2 hearts or spades are all good bids. I'll probably go the conservative way and bid 1♠, followed by 2♥ after pard's 2♦ or 1NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted October 19, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 Lol, sorry for the topic title, when I post at work I am more worried about if the boss comes than what do I type. keeping the bidding low is good, but since 2♥ later is cheaper than 2♠, it might be good. I guess for everyone that bids 1♥ if they instead bid 1♠ then hearts that shows 4-3 in the majors. I was thinking if it couldn't be better to switch and the 1♥ then 2♠ shows 4441 while 1♠ then 2♥ would show 5440. From my recent experience having trouble diferentiatin the void and singleton it would had been an advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 [hv=s=sqxhxxxxdjxxxxcjx]133|100|[/hv] Do you expect your partner to take a call over a 1♥ rebid? I don't. 4♥ should be a claim. And, if you think that hand will bid over 1♥, how about this one: [hv=s=sqxhxxxxdjxxxxcjx]133|100|[/hv] Yes, he might have responded 1♠ on these cards. And many would (if they don't pass the 1♣ opening). But 4S will be a claim on this hand. Even this hand: [hv=s=sqxhxxxxdjxxxxcjx]133|100|[/hv] has a lot of play for 4S. And many would respond 1♦ and pass out 1♥. There is a lot to be said for bidding only 1♥. But it has risks. Honestly it would never occur to me that I should respond to an opening bid and then pass partner's rebid at the one-level in a 4-2 fit. Really those 4-2 fits don't play very well. So on the second and third example hands, while I might've passed 1♣, having bid over 1♣ I would definitely be bidding on over 1♥. In my usual up-the-line style it would be 1♠ next from both hands; if playing Walsh I might've bid 1♠ to begin with. As to the first example hand, I'm not so convinced game is great here. While there are not many losers, there are also not many tricks. Diamonds can tap out the declarer hand pretty easily, and even with the club finesse on you have three spades, two clubs, and some number of hearts which is not really very likely to be five. If I played 1♥ here I think I'd be glad to have avoided playing 1♣, and would be happy to make nine tricks... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 1) It would be ridiculous to pass 1♥ on a doubleton. Ever. And your first example hand isn't even a good game. 2) Your examples involve partner having nothing at all in his long suit, which is always a foolish assumption to make. How much more likely that partner has KQ of diamonds and out? The answer: much. So sorry if the examples do not exactly convince me of anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 I suspect that nothing that I could write would ever convince you of anything. And the reason that the bidder has nothing in his suit is that he has nothing in his hand. But game is still reasonable. As far as passing the 1♥ rebid on a doubleton is concerned, are you really advocating taking two bids on these cards? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted October 19, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 hehehe, this reminds me an old argument, 1/1 is forcing untill 1NT here :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 I suspect that nothing that I could write would ever convince you of anything. And the reason that the bidder has nothing in his suit is that he has nothing in his hand. But game is still reasonable. As far as passing the 1♥ rebid on a doubleton is concerned, are you really advocating taking two bids on these cards? Nah, that impression only comes since agreement is generally quiet and disagreement is louder and messier. I'm sure you would be the first to admit that you often support known minority positions (as do I sometimes.) In fact (not to be all high and mighty) but I believe, despite the fact I often come across hard and am pretty blunt with what I write, that I openly admit to having my opinion changed by the opinions of the other posters more often than most/all people here. Cards outside diamonds in your examples: AQQJJ. Cards in diamonds: JJ. The diamonds are 44% of the total cards and contain 17% of the points, which are all in the form of lonely jacks. So don't go making excuses for your unreasonable examples. Just say Mea Culpa and move on with life. I am advocating taking either 0 or 2 bids on those cards (0 on the first example, 2 on the others.) Passing 1♥ is no option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 Clear 1♥ imo, partner may pass sometimes but we usually won't have game on those hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 The example hand given is actually closer to a 2♣ opening than a one bid by modified loser count - it is a 3 loser hand, which is one criterion for opening 2♣. As is fairly obvious to all, this is not a 2♣ opening, but it is very strong. 3 suited strong hands are difficult to handle (hence the invention of the original Roman 2♦ bid, which is perfect for this hand). It seems to me to be worth the risk of getting too high to avoid the risk of getting too low. So, once partner responds to my 1♣ opening, I am not willing to settle for less than game. Others are willing to take that risk by rebidding only 1♥. When bids like these are made in the Master Solvers' Club in The Bridge World, they are usually accompanied by statements like "if I can only survive this round of the bidding." If partner takes another call, you will probably be better placed than I am. However, given that one poster says he is not willing to pass 1♥ holding a doubleton heart, it may be 6 of one and a half-dozen of the other. For example, suppose you hold: [hv=s=sxxxhjxdqjxxxxcxx]133|100|[/hv] Would you respond to a 1♣ opening bid? If so, would you bid 1♦? A weak jump-shift in diamonds (assuming that it is available)? If you respond 1♦, do you bid again if partner rebids 1♥? If you do, you will certainly get to a terrible game contract. I assume that if you rebid 1♥ on the 4405 hand given as the problem hand in this thread that you will not allow the bidding to stop short of game if partner takes two calls. Many years ago, I played several events at an ACBL Spring Nationals with John Potter. John gave me one rule that I had to obey while playing with him. If I had less than 6HCP, I could not respond to a 1 bid. I call this "Potter's Rule." Now, I know that most of you are not followers of Potter's Rule. If you were, you probably would not rebid 1♥ on the 4405 hand in this thread. And while following Potter's Rule may not get you the best results on some hands, it does make life a lot easier on quite a few other hands. John Potter is a pretty good player. And his "rule" is not absurd. But it does make life a lot less interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted October 19, 2007 Report Share Posted October 19, 2007 Hmm, Hamman's rule or Potter's rule, what to do... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted October 20, 2007 Report Share Posted October 20, 2007 1♥, what is this problem even doing here? 2♥ at least I know what the person is thinking, 1♠ I don't. Art you really think that if partner passes 1♥ (which would be some 5-6 count) and his first response is in your void that you are missing game? I guess anything is possible but I seriously doubt it. Agree 100%. Actually I can't understand why people don't play 1H as forcing, but still.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted October 20, 2007 Report Share Posted October 20, 2007 1♥, what is this problem even doing here? 2♥ at least I know what the person is thinking, 1♠ I don't. Art you really think that if partner passes 1♥ (which would be some 5-6 count) and his first response is in your void that you are missing game? I guess anything is possible but I seriously doubt it. Agree 100%. Actually I can't understand why people don't play 1H as forcing, but still.... Actually I play 1♥ as forcing, both when 1♦ is natural and when it's a transfer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted October 20, 2007 Report Share Posted October 20, 2007 Actually I can't understand why people don't play 1H as forcing, but still.... That's because a forcing 1♥ would show 11-20 hcp, maybe more in some cases. If you truncate 1♥ to, say, 11-17, leaving the jump shift 2♥ to show the 18-20 hand, it makes subsequent bidding easier. Of course, you can live with 1♥ forcing but there's a trade-off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.