H_KARLUK Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 [hv=d=w&v=b&s=sa8432hkjt95d5ct8]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 1♦ P 1♠ P2♣ P ? Your technical analyses please.Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TylerE Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Abstain. Hate 1♠. What's wrong with 1♥? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_KARLUK Posted February 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Abstain. Hate 1♠. What's wrong with 1♥? Good question. Perhaps responder tried to avoid problematic responder's reverse or FSF for later stages. I know complete deal and auction. And I really wonder post-mortem over double dummy. For now let's try to find a bid please.ThanksHamdi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Abstain. Hate 1♠. What's wrong with 1♥? Good question. Perhaps responder tried to avoid problematic responder's reverse or FSF for later stages. I know complete deal and auction. And I really wonder post-mortem over double dummy. For now let's try to find a bid please.ThanksHamdi I think that you are stuck rebidding 2NT I suspect that Tyler was advocating a 1♥ response because he was ANTICIPATING the problems that a 4th suit forcing auction would present... This hand isn't strong enough to show both Hearts and Spades. A 1♥ response gives opener the opportunity to respond 1♠ on the first round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Pass <_< Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogerclee Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Abstain. Hate 1♠. What's wrong with 1♥? LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OleBerg Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 A popular treatment here in DK, is to have 3♥ showing 5-5 and invitational values. I don't know how hot it is, but at least it describes the hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 <!-- ONEHAND begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> Dealer: </td> <td> West </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Vul: </td> <td> Both </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Scoring: </td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </span> </th> <td> A8432 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> KJT95 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> 5 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> T8 </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table><!-- ONEHAND end --> 1♦ P 1♠ P2♣ P ? Your technical analyses please.Thanks Many in the Forum play reverse flannery here with that responder hand. 1minor=2h=4+h and 5+s..less than invite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OleBerg Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Another approach, only played by one pair in DK as far as i know, is this: 1♦ -2♦ = Inverted minor or 5-5 in the majors, less than a gameforce. Goes for 1♣ - 2♣ too. Called "ToMax". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_KARLUK Posted February 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 [hv=d=w&v=b&n=sk76h7643dk973c32&w=sjha82da8642ca965&e=sa8432hkjt95d5ct8&s=sqt95hqdqjtckqj74]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 1♦ P 1♠ P2♣ AP As we looked records seems that hand played in an international event some time ago. In respect to privacy sorry I cannot post names and sources. However, in our team practice&analyse we also couldn't find some healthy logic. That's why i thought perhaps it would be suitable to ask players from other countries ideas. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Tu Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Can't believe there are people advocating 1♥. Doesn't that miss a ton of 5-3 spade fits? Auction 1♦-1♠-1nt allowing you to get to 2h/2s should be a lot more common than the actual auction. Obviously playing responder's reverse flannery will work on this hand. As would responder just randomly overbidding. Otherwise the only way to get to a heart partial in my view is for opener to rebid 1nt, playing a style where it's OK to rebid it with a singleton spade a min hand, reserving 2c for hands with extra values/shape. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TylerE Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 1♦ - 1♥2♥ (1) - 3/4♥ (Depending on how enthusiastic you feel...) (1) - If there was ever a hand to raise with 3 card support, it's this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Tu Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 For those advocating 1♥, explain how this works better when opener is 3154 shape instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 For those advocating 1♥, explain how this works better when opener is 3154 shape instead. Far be it for me to speak for those advocating 1♥, however, I don't think that the purpose is to score better on hands suitable for a 3 card (or even a 4 card raise) I suspect that the allure of 1♥ has to do with catering for a 1♠ rebid by opener... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 For those advocating 1♥, explain how this works better when opener is 3154 shape instead. Far be it for me to speak for those advocating 1♥, however, I don't think that the purpose is to score better on hands suitable for a 3 card (or even a 4 card raise) I suspect that the allure of 1♥ has to do with catering for a 1♠ rebid by opener... Likewise I'm not advocating the bid, but I think the point is to cater to a 2♣ or 2♦ rebid by opener. If you bid 1♠ you will not find a 5-3 or 5-4 heart fit after a 2♣ or 2♦ rebid. If you bid 1♥ you will not find a 5-3 spade fit after any rebid. If the hand was weaker and still had bad spades and good hearts, say xxxxx KJT9x x xx, then I think 1♥ has a lot going for it. If partner is rebidding 1NT then the opponents can surely make something in a minor, and if LHO is going to overcall then you are often glad you bid your best suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 1♥ 'works' only if partner would raise hearts AND would otherwise make an unfortunate call over 1♠. So 1♥ 'works' if opener is 1354 or 1444.. and even then only if opener would not rebid 1N: a lot of players, these days, will rebid 1N on these patterns. In the meantime, 1♥ leaves us poorly placed if he rebids 1N (and since 1N rates to be the most common rebid, this is a non-trivial issue) It is also poor if: 1. he has 3 spades and fewer than 3 hearts2. he has a big hand... and jumps to 3♦ or 2N3. Depending on your tolerance for bidding 1♠ then 2♥ over a 2♦ rebid In my view, with this hand a response of 1♥ is extremely poor. Yes, on the actual hand, assuming opener would not rebid 1N (and I wouldn't), we regret not responding 1♥. So what? And the answer, of course, is to play different methods... a 2♥ response is playable here, as 5+ spades and 4+ hearts with a weak hand... this would be a super-max for me playing that gadget, but it definitely 'works' infinitely better than that woeful 1♥ On the actual hand, given that system forced the 1♠, I would have bid 2♦. But, in my partnerships, we almost never open 1♦ and rebid 2♣ on 4=5 hands.. and the upside is that partner is allowed to take another call with significant extras... if he bids 2N, for example, I will bid 4♥. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 So 1♥ 'works' if opener is 1354 or 1444.. and even then only if opener would not rebid 1N: a lot of players, these days, will rebid 1N on these patterns.(Reitterating that I would have responded 1♠ on the actual hand, not 1♥)It also works when opener rebids his minor. For example 1363 or 1462, 1♦ 1♠ 2♦ 2♥ is forcing and could get you very high with no fit if opener has the wrong shape. 1♦ 1♥ 2♥ is much nicer. So I think it has more upside than you give credit for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 I though 2♥ followed by 3♥ was limit 5-5 for most people. It is an overbid of couse, but it is so so much better than 2NT. 1♥ is the big winner when partner is 1453. 2♦ = 90 vs 4♥ 620 booted us from the qualifying in 2005's Transnational in Estoril. Also a point for bidding 1♥ is that you can rebid 2♥ after 2♣, but rebidding spades is very sick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobowolf Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 So 1♥ 'works' if opener is 1354 or 1444.. and even then only if opener would not rebid 1N: a lot of players, these days, will rebid 1N on these patterns.(Reitterating that I would have responded 1♠ on the actual hand, not 1♥)It also works when opener rebids his minor. For example 1363 or 1462, 1♦ 1♠ 2♦ 2♥ is forcing and could get you very high with no fit if opener has the wrong shape. 1♦ 1♥ 2♥ is much nicer. So I think it has more upside than you give credit for. It also works when opener has 4 spades. I, also, would have bid 1♠. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 It also works when opener has 4 spades. "Works" is shorthand for "works better than responding 1♠ works", which I thought was obvious from the context. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 So 1♥ 'works' if opener is 1354 or 1444.. and even then only if opener would not rebid 1N: a lot of players, these days, will rebid 1N on these patterns.(Reitterating that I would have responded 1♠ on the actual hand, not 1♥)It also works when opener rebids his minor. For example 1363 or 1462, 1♦ 1♠ 2♦ 2♥ is forcing and could get you very high with no fit if opener has the wrong shape. 1♦ 1♥ 2♥ is much nicer. So I think it has more upside than you give credit for.While 1♠ then 2♥ is usually played as forcing (after a 2♦ rebid), one doesn't need to do so, if one is prepared, for example, to play 2N as forcing... but that is a digression and not really responsive since it implies specialized and unorthodox treatments. However, altho 2♥ is forcing, I don't think that it creates a gf.. thus, responder can pass 2♠ or 3♣, and can bid a non-forcing 3♥ over 2N.. so while the hand is minimum, if opener rebid 2♦, I don't see a lot of problems with 1♠ then 2♥ with this hand... please... note... I said a 'lot' of problems.. I am not saying that this treatment is free of all problems.. but it is surely less problematic than responding 1♥ :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobowolf Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 It also works when opener has 4 spades. "Works" is shorthand for "works better than responding 1♠ works", which I thought was obvious from the context. I think it's a poor definition for "works" in this context. When they're equally good, saying that 1♥ doesn't "work," because it's not better, has an inappropriate negative connotation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOL Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 It also works when opener has 4 spades. "Works" is shorthand for "works better than responding 1♠ works", which I thought was obvious from the context. I think it's a poor definition for "works" in this context. When they're equally good, saying that 1♥ doesn't "work," because it's not better, has an inappropriate negative connotation. well..... I put 'works' in quotations... that might have been a 'clue'. As for suggesting that my comment meant that 1♥ is only 'not better' than 1♠... all I can say is......LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Silly semantic discussions are confined to the water cooler. 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.