Playing normalish 2/1 with a good partner,

[Winstonm]

Josh,

 

Did you misremember the hand?  The Qx in question was spades, not hearts.

Qx, xx, AKJx, Kxxxx

 

You were asked what to rebid and you said 1N.  That may be your style but it the Qx in my partner's 4 card suit isn't a strong reason to play from my side.

Yes I misremembered though it's still an easy 1NT bid to me. I would certainly prefer Qx in their suit, that's for sure.

 

Think of it another way. Rebidding 1NT on any hand where you would have passed a 1NT bid by partner takes a TON of pressure off him when he has 4 in the other major and their suit stopped. Partner can be 4-4 in the majors and make his negative double, not worried that 1NT will be missed any time you don't have a spade fit with him.

Do you open 1D or 1C when 1345? If you open open 1C, do you still bid 1N in this auction with something like x, xxx, AQxx, AKxxx?

 

Reason I am curious is I have always opened these hands 1D and never found a real good reason to change my ways.

[CSGibson]

As to the OP: 2♦ reverse (and forcing 1 round). I have heard several voices for 3♦; for me that would be a mini-splinter in support of partner's major.

[Free]

Imo 2♦ is not a reverse, so I'd bid 3♦

[Codo]

Nor is it the normal style when playing variants of Polish Club.

The thread said 2/1!!! You are going to unbelievable lengths to refuse to admit you could ever be wrong about anything.

Josh, even 2/1 is played in more then one place.

And the double is still not played the same way everywhere.

 

But you did not answer the question: When the x just promises spades, what exactly did Mbodell ask?

 

I mean, when your style is the consensus of 2/1 worldwide, why isn`t this a simple "2♦ wtp???" answer?

Maybe because your way of thinking is not as universal as it seems to be for you?

[jdonn]

I mean, when your style is the consensus of 2/1 worldwide, why isn`t this a simple  "2♦ wtp???"  answer?

Because some people don't know. That doesn't mean it's untrue.

 

The same argument works against you. You are saying obviously 2♦ is a reverse if double is 4 spades and nothing about diamonds, and obviously 2♦ is not a reverse if double showed diamonds also or if double showed 0-3 spades. So if that's true why didn't he ask what the double is instead of asking what to bid now?

[straube]

Do you open 1D or 1C when 1345? If you open open 1C, do you still bid 1N in this auction with something like x, xxx, AQxx, AKxxx?

 

Reason I am curious is I have always opened these hands 1D and never found a real good reason to change my ways.

 

If you're playing a strong club, then opening 1D and rebidding 2C to show 5/4 or 4/5 works pretty well. You're limited to something like 15 points.

 

If you're playing a standard system (like SAYC or 2/1), then you have a bigger problem if 1D-1L, 2C can be either 5/4 or 4/5 and something like 11 to 17. Probably what you're playing is that 1D-1L, 2C shows either 11-15 with 4/5 or 11-17 with 5/4.

 

A fairly standard treatment is that 4/5 hands will open 1C and reverse or rebid clubs depending on whether opener has a strong (16+) or regular (11-15) hand.

 

A common treatment used to be that with 5/4 one rebid diamonds with 11-15 and rebid clubs with 16 or more. One can argue that bidding diamonds again with 1-3-5-4 is sort of like bidding clubs again with 1-3-4-5.

 

Nowadays the trend is to show the pattern and not reserve the 2C as a forcing bid, but many pairs play that it is almost forcing. After all, opener can still have 11-17 or so and if game is still possible, responder wants to give opener a third chance to bid. Responder can give a false preference to 2D just to give opener that chance.

 

If, however, 1D-1L, 2C can be 4/5, it's no longer safe to give a false preference and games will be missed when opener has 5/4 and 16-17.

[straube]

Josh,

 

Did you misremember the hand?  The Qx in question was spades, not hearts.

Qx, xx, AKJx, Kxxxx

 

You were asked what to rebid and you said 1N.  That may be your style but it the Qx in my partner's 4 card suit isn't a strong reason to play from my side.

Yes I misremembered though it's still an easy 1NT bid to me. I would certainly prefer Qx in their suit, that's for sure.

 

Think of it another way. Rebidding 1NT on any hand where you would have passed a 1NT bid by partner takes a TON of pressure off him when he has 4 in the other major and their suit stopped. Partner can be 4-4 in the majors and make his negative double, not worried that 1NT will be missed any time you don't have a spade fit with him.

 

My partner and I play that the double shows 4 spades. Not at all sure that this is correct. My point, however, is that we also play that when opener rebids 1S at the 1-level, he usually shows three spades. With four spades, opener would bid 2S.

 

It doesn't help with this hand, but it would with others. In fact, one could argue for a 1S rebid being a catchall bid or even showing diamonds and a minimum hand.

[mike777]

This may have been said but an option here is:

2d=natural, minimum

3d=natural, extra, nongame forcing

2h=cuebid game forcing.

 

 

"I think 3D is about right. Over that, with a bad hand, responder can pass or bail to 4C with a bad hand with a club preference such as: QJxx xxxx x Axxx. The good news is that responder knows that opener has at least 5 clubs, at least in all my partnerships where we always open 1 diamond with 4-4 in the minors.

 

 

 

And over 3D, with a better hand, responder can bid anything besides 4C to move towards game in NT or in either minor."

[awm]

If you're playing a strong club, then opening 1D and rebidding 2C to show 5/4 or 4/5 works pretty well. You're limited to something like 15 points.

I disagree that this works pretty well. In fact I think it is one of the substantial disadvantages to playing a strong club system. Not only does this method make it hard to pick the right partial when responder has equal length in the minors, it also makes it hard to reach the right partial on a declined invitation (i.e. responder can't bid 3♦ on 3-card support and play there if opener is minimum). And it even makes things awkward on slam auctions, because after you bid fourth-suit forcing it is harder for opener to disambiguate shape (more distributions are possible).

 

Obviously strong club systems have many advantages (and I do play them in some partnerships) but if I'm playing standard or 2/1 I certainly would not want to add this particular "feature" to my methods.

[straube]

If you're playing a strong club, then opening 1D and rebidding 2C to show 5/4 or 4/5 works pretty well.  You're limited to something like 15 points.

I disagree that this works pretty well. In fact I think it is one of the substantial disadvantages to playing a strong club system. Not only does this method make it hard to pick the right partial when responder has equal length in the minors, it also makes it hard to reach the right partial on a declined invitation (i.e. responder can't bid 3♦ on 3-card support and play there if opener is minimum). And it even makes things awkward on slam auctions, because after you bid fourth-suit forcing it is harder for opener to disambiguate shape (more distributions are possible).

 

Obviously strong club systems have many advantages (and I do play them in some partnerships) but if I'm playing standard or 2/1 I certainly would not want to add this particular "feature" to my methods.

 

I'm still comfortable with "pretty well". I know that Meckwell used to even rebid 2C with 1-4-(53) shape, though I think they changed this so that 2C always promises 5/4 or 4/5.

 

It's true that when responder wants to make an invitation, he's disadvantaged in not knowing which of opener's minors is longer, but at least he knows partner has four cards in each suit. Strong club pairs who use 1D-1L, 2C don't have the kind of silliness that many standard players who open and then rebid clubs do. For example, with 1-3-4-5 the bidding for many will go 1C-1S, 2C (for reasons that I discussed in my previous post).

 

If there's a 4/4 or a 5/4 fit, the method will find it. If there's a 5/3 fit that goes undiscovered, the partnership can play 2N. Sometimes 2N is a better contract anyway.

 

I like for 1D-2H to show 5S and 4H and less than GI. This avoids silliness when responder is 5-4-2-2 and opener is 1-3-(54). It has other advantages, too. If one is afraid of 4-5-2-2, then consider a rebid of 1S with 3-1-(54); just make sure you have methods to untangle this....my partner and I decided that it wasn't worth the extra memory work.

 

Finally, if one uses 4SF, a strong club pair can relay out partner's exact shape.

[LH2650]

"After one club — (one of a major) — double — (pass) — ?, opener’s two-diamond rebid does not show extra values." - Bridge World Standard

 

In undiscussed areas, I tend to assume BWS. That said, I have discussed this with only one partner, and we play it as showing extra values. However, we also play that 1N does not suggest a ♥ stopper.

[straube]

"After one club — (one of a major) — double — (pass) — ?, opener’s two-diamond rebid does not show extra values." - Bridge World Standard

 

In undiscussed areas, I tend to assume BWS.  That said, I have discussed this with only one partner, and we play it as showing extra values.  However, we also play that 1N does not suggest a ♥ stopper.

How does BWS define the negative double?

[neilkaz]

I'll chime in with my 2 cents worth and mention that Bergen's NegX book says that this sequence is a reverse.

 

It is also very useful to play after the 1♣...2♦ reverse that the 4th suit is Leb and wants badly to sign off and even can pass a 2NT rebid from a flattish (for a reverse) opener with the 4th suit likely stopped.

 

This negX sequence also shows why in S. Am we prefer to open 1♦ when 44 in majors lacking 4♠

[Winstonm]

If you're playing a standard system (like SAYC or 2/1), then you have a bigger problem if 1D-1L, 2C can be either 5/4 or 4/5 and something like 11 to 17. Probably what you're playing is that 1D-1L, 2C shows either 11-15 with 4/5 or 11-17 with 5/4.

 

I have to differ with your analysis. The entire object of opening the 4-card suit is the concept of preparedness, i.e., having a convenient bid to make when partner makes an inconvenient bid and your hand is not suitable for a NT rebid.

 

This is the reason many fine players will still open 1H with 4H and 5D - I bet under the right situation died-in-the-wool 4-card majorites like Eddie Kantar and Bob Hamman would still open 1H on some hands.

 

The same holds true in the minors. If you believe like the older players that 1345 is not NT shape, then over 1D-1S you would rebid 2C. The secret to making this work is for responder to never hold 2-2 in the minors. :ph34r:

 

So the concept of 2D after the negative double as a reverse means that you always open 1C when 45 and always rebid 1N with 13 or 22 major shape. This is the only way 2D can be a guaranteed reverse after the double.

 

So if you had A, 245, AKJ9, 108742 you would open 1C and then you can't bid 2D after 1H-X because it would be a reverse.

 

Hmmm. Well, I guess evolution doesn't always improve the species.

[benlessard]

I think the chance to bid a 2nd natural suit is more important than the chance of reversing a level lower. There are many hand where you would rebid 1Nt but after the overcall and the neg X bidding diamonds will turn better. I hate to rebid 1Nt without a stop and rebid 2C with a lousy suit more then bidding my 2nd suit even if it mean partner has to preferrence me to the 3 level.

 

Many 2245 are 1C opening followed by 1Nt. But after the overcall and the neg X 2D as non-reverse is a nice possibility even at the risk of playing 3C instead of 2C.

 

 

1C------(1S)--------X--------(P)

2C------(2S) all pass

 

vs

 

1C-------(1S)-------X--------(P)

2D-------(2S)------- here responder can easily be 3451

[jdonn]

This is the reason many fine players will still open 1H with 4H and 5D

I think we have a different definition of the word "many". Or maybe it's just the definition of the word "fine" when used in conjunction with "many". :)

 

If you believe like the older players that 1345 is not NT shape, then over 1D-1S you would rebid 2C.  The secret to making this work is for responder to never hold 2-2 in the minors.  :ph34r:

Or 3-3. Or for that matter 2-3 depending on the rest of the hand...

 

So the concept of 2D after the negative double as a reverse means that you always open 1C when 45 and always rebid 1N with 13 or 22 major shape.  This is the only way 2D can be a guaranteed reverse after the double.

what the...

 

So if you had A, 245, AKJ9, 108742 you would open 1C and then you can't bid 2D after 1H-X because it would be a reverse.

Post that hand and see what people open, even those who 'always' open 1♣ with 4-5 in the minors.

 

Hmmm.  Well, I guess evolution doesn't always improve the species.

It's always someone who refused to evolve that says that...

[straube]

If you're playing a standard system (like SAYC or 2/1), then you have a bigger problem if 1D-1L, 2C can be either 5/4 or 4/5 and something like 11 to 17. Probably what you're playing is that 1D-1L, 2C shows either 11-15 with 4/5 or 11-17 with 5/4.

 

I have to differ with your analysis. The entire object of opening the 4-card suit is the concept of preparedness, i.e., having a convenient bid to make when partner makes an inconvenient bid and your hand is not suitable for a NT rebid.

 

This is the reason many fine players will still open 1H with 4H and 5D - I bet under the right situation died-in-the-wool 4-card majorites like Eddie Kantar and Bob Hamman would still open 1H on some hands.

 

The same holds true in the minors. If you believe like the older players that 1345 is not NT shape, then over 1D-1S you would rebid 2C. The secret to making this work is for responder to never hold 2-2 in the minors. :ph34r:

 

So the concept of 2D after the negative double as a reverse means that you always open 1C when 45 and always rebid 1N with 13 or 22 major shape. This is the only way 2D can be a guaranteed reverse after the double.

 

So if you had A, 245, AKJ9, 108742 you would open 1C and then you can't bid 2D after 1H-X because it would be a reverse.

 

Hmmm. Well, I guess evolution doesn't always improve the species.

Looks like the advantage to your method is preparedness.

 

The advantage to my method is knowing respective suit lengths and being able to attract a false preference to 2D so that opening hand can bid again.

 

I've found two links which discuss the 1D-1L, 2C rebid in terms of a forcing bid.

 

One is K-S...

 

http://www.bridgehands.com/Conventions/Kap...d_KS_System.htm

 

and the other is Cole...

 

http://www.bridgeguys.com/Conventions/Cole.html

 

Both of these use 1D-1L, 3C as an intermediate hand with 5m/5m and

1D-1L, 2D as possibly only 5 diamonds.

 

I'm not saying that their methods are better. I'm only using them to illustrate that the sequence 1D-1L, 2C is difficult (especially because opener's range is so wide here) and that if some good players thought that 2C ought to be forcing that we might think that it is at least highly encouraging of another bid....which it can't very well be if opener can have 4D and 5C.

 

As to the hand you suggested, A xxx AKJ9 T8xxx, I would prefer...

1C-1L, 2C to

1D-1L, 2C

but what I really prefer is...

1C-1L, 1N

 

1N is much better for several reasons....

 

1. I dislike rebidding a 5-card suit and especially the one you gave me.

2. I leave more room for partner. He can make a GI and we can get out in 2M

.....(this is aided greatly if 1m-2H shows 5S/4H)

3. Partner still has room to find out my exact pattern.

4. 1N usually scores better than 2m

5. Partner ought to be alert to my having a stiff spade anyway for when I'm

.....1-4-4-4 (or would you open 1D and rebid 2C on this as well?)

 

True, the downside is that partner can't sign off in 2S with only five now. I'll take some losses with this, but I think I gain more.

 

Now I'll give you a hand. With A AKJ9 xxx T8xxx what's your open and what's your rebid over 1S? I plan to open 1C and rebid 1N.

[barryallen]

If my partner has a more pedestrian hand I think he would be disappointed by a reverse.

Could you explain the basis of that comment please?

Sure,

 

I don't think the hand is good enough for a reverse. I think partner will say in the post mortem, that hand wasn't good enough for a reverse. I would answer, you're right, it isn't good enough for a reverse.

Bridge is never always a game of perfect, but I feel a 2♦ reverse is not that much of an exaggeration. And if I had to choose between a slightly overbid than an underbid, I would go for the slight overbid which leaves plenty of bidding space to sort things out.

[Winstonm]

Post that hand and see what people open, even those who 'always' open 1♣ with 4-5 in the minors.

 

Then always doesn't always mean always.

 

 

Hmmm.  Well, I guess evolution doesn't always improve the species.

 

 

It's always someone who refused to evolve that says that...

 

Zactly! LoL. Who said there aren't living dinosaurs?

[jdonn]

Post that hand and see what people open, even those who 'always' open 1♣ with 4-5 in the minors.

 

Then always doesn't always mean always.

No, 'always' doesnt mean always. :)

[jdeegan]

:P Does 2♦ show extras? Should it? Absent any specific partnership agreement why not just bid a fairly descriptive and unambiguous 3♣?