Is this obvious?

[dbsboy]

[hv=d=s&s=saxxhxdakxxcaxxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

I am a strong believer in opening 1♣ with 5 Clubs and 4 Diamonds. However, I found a really difficult rebid problem no matter partner responds in any Major. It seems that I cannot show my strength and shape effectively.

 

If I open 1♦, will the bidding go much smoother?

[mtvesuvius]

The given hand is almost enough to reverse and you don't have too many problems when partner responds 1♠, but the real problem is when partner responds 1♥, now you must bid 1NT on a stiff, or rebid your 5 card suit or Reverse. This is why it is better to open 1♦, the only disadvantage is that with equal length in the minors partner will correct back to ♦ if you rebid 2♣. The advantage is that you are well placed for a rebid over any bid by partner, this is why 1♦ is the favored opening here. Add in one or two more points and you can open 1♣ and reverse, but reversing on 15 counts is not a good strategy in the long run.

[jdonn]

I open 1♦ because I'm just too strong to rebid 1NT if partner bids 1♥, but too weak to plan to reverse. At least the diamonds aren't a bad suit.

[whereagles]

I'll reverse, even if pard bids 1♥.

 

If I were a little bit weaker, I'd open 1♣ and rebid those. This isn't US style. This is European.

[P_Marlowe]

1C, followed by 2C.

 

For me the hand is strong enough to bid 1C - 2D,

but if you prefer to play the main stream NA style,

the hand is too weak to make a reverse.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Codo]

I am European, but this hand is too weak for a reverse after 1 Club 1 Heart for me. Just slightly, but still.

After 1 ♣ 1 ♠ I would reverse and later bid spades.

 

I do not care about 1 ♣1 ♥ 2 ♣ or 1 ♦ 1♥ 2 ♣. I have played both ways and did not notice a significant advantage for one or another approach.

[maggieb]

I am American, but if I open 1C and partner bids 1S I have an easy 2D bid, this 15-count suddenly looks very good. :(

 

If partner bids 1H and both opponents pass then I have a awkward rebid. Had I opened 1D then I would have had a clear 2C rebid, but while I wouldn't have a difficult decision, I would risk playing in a silly 4-2 fit.

 

If partner bids 1D I have an easy 3D bid. If partner raises clubs then we are in an excellent position. If the opponents bid hearts I'm glad I opened my longest suit. Taking all these possibilities into account I would open 1C.

 

Now let's talk about our rebid after 1C-1H, anybody else tempted by 1S? :)

[rogerclee]

I would open 1♣ and rebid 1N over partner's 1♥, Maggie.

[jdonn]

So I guess this is the answer to "what hand can be opened 1♣ and over a 1♥ response rebid either 1♠, 1NT, 2♣, or 2♦?"

 

If I had opened 1♣ then over a 1♥ response I'm pretty confident 1♠ is the best rebid. And it amazes me more and more how often that is my feeling about the cheapest option.

 

Btw just to toss it out there, I think opening 1NT is better than some of the suggestions. It risks a 5-1 heart fit, but everyone else seems to be risking a 3-3 spade fit, 5-1 club fit, or 4-2 diamond fit. Or overbidding or underbidding. At least 1NT gets our strength very accurately, which really can't be said about any other option.

[kenrexford]

I'm a firm believer in handling this holding with a rebid of 1♠ if partner responds 1♥. However, part of my motivation is a walsh approach, where the 1♠ rebid is made with a fifth club. I feel that the partnership can handle a 1♠ rebid that implies 4♠/5+♣ when I have 3♠/5♣ a lot better than if 1♠ could be bid with 4333 shape. If 1♠ implies 4♠/3+♣, I have fudged with little redemption. In the 4♠/5+♣ situation, the fudge has the redemption that I have put a 5-card club suit on the table and have indicated (correctly) an unbalanced hand. I only do this, however, with this 3145 shape.

 

I'd raise spades, BTW, whenever I have this precise pattern but deem the hand not good enough for a reverse.

 

1345 is more of a problem.

[jdonn]

Ken how do you feel if you're one of those silly people like me who play 1♠ shows 4 spades and 4+ clubs (not walsh, but rebid 1NT on 4333)?

[dcvetkov]

Ken how do you feel if you're one of those silly people like me who play 1♠ shows 4 spades and 4+ clubs (not walsh, but rebid 1NT on 4333)?

Yes, there are quite a few silly people out there;)

 

1C-- 1H

1S

 

This rebid promises unbalanced hand, most of the time you will have 5 clubs and 4 spades. With balanced hand, I bid 1NT even with 4 spades. Partner can inquire later if he wishes

[kenrexford]

Ken how do you feel if you're one of those silly people like me who play 1♠ shows 4 spades and 4+ clubs (not walsh, but rebid 1NT on 4333)?

I'd probably still rebid 1♠, admittedly. I'd like it less, but it's my call.

[straube]

1S. 1S saves the most room and lets me play XYZ. Hopefully, we have agreements to sort out this hand from the 4-cd variety because there is plenty of room to do so.

[Free]

Where's Richard with his 1NT opening? :unsure:

[awm]

I'd open 1♣ and rebid 1NT over 1♥. Obviously this is not some perfect solution. I like this somewhat better than rebidding 1♠, because I expect partner to take my major suit bids seriously and it could be hard to avoid a 4-3 or even 3-3 spade fit after that sequence. I'd rather under bid by a point (and with "aces and spaces" and no clear fit, and singleton opposite partner's suit, this may not be so much of an under bid) rather than show a four-card major that I don't have.

 

Keep in mind that the auction doesn't have to go 1X-P-1♥-P to me. Often the opponents will be bidding. There are many sequences such as 1X-2♥-P-P or 1X-P-1NT-2♥ where I will be glad to have started the bidding by naming my longest suit.

[MarkDean]

I would open 1♣, and rebid 1♠ over 1♥. I have done this a few times, and so far it has worked out well. I actually consider what to do over 1♠ a closer call: hand is awfully good for 2♠. Give me the T9 of clubs, and I would definitely reverse.

[the hog]

I'm a firm believer in handling this holding with a rebid of 1♠ if partner responds 1♥.

I'm a firm believer in not lying to my partner.

 

I would prefer to open 1D and rebid 2C, but if partner is not happy with that, I would open 1C and rebid 1NT.

[kenrexford]

I'm a firm believer in handling this holding with a rebid of 1♠ if partner responds 1♥.

I'm a firm believer in not lying to my partner.

 

I would prefer to open 1D and rebid 2C, but if partner is not happy with that, I would open 1C and rebid 1NT.

This kind of comment drives me nuts.

 

Sure, if you are one of those kind of people who believes that your opinion is correct and that your partner obviously will expect you to have what you believe you should have, and bidding 1♠ here is not right in your opinion, then bidding 1♠ here is a lie.

 

However, guess what? There is a very good argument as to why my 1♠ call with this hand is not a lie to partner. I wonder if maybe ou can guess what that is...

 

As the ignorance of your comments like this suggests that you might need help with this problem, I'll help you out.

 

I discuss this sort of thing with my partners.

 

That makes it no longer a "lie." Rather, the call actually shows this.

 

Weird, huh?

 

So, for instance, when I have this pattern, open 1♣, hear a 1♥ response, and bid 1♠, my partner knows that I have five+ clubs and 3-4 spades (only three spades when precisely five clubs). Since I have 3♠/5♣, a holding allowed by definition, then I have told no lie. We have seen this situation before and have discussed it.

 

Similarly, if I would have instead heard 1♠ and raised to 2♠, this would also not be a lie, as the 2♠ raise shows 4-card support or 3-card if I have specifically 3145 or 3415 shape. In that sequence, I cannot simply have 3♠/5♣ but also need 1-4 in the reds, either way, because with 3325/3235 I rebid 1NT or possibly 2♣. If partner now bids 2NT, by 3♣ call shows the 3-card fit and hence 14/41 in the reds. Again, not a lie because of discussion.

 

See, the reason I bid 1♠ is not that I come up with a solution for a difficult problem on the fly, willing to lie because I am a mastermind. Rather, I as Opener will bid this way and as Responder will expect partner to bid this way because we have discovered that this is a problem hand and have discussed this solution as the best solution, agreeing to adopt the same for that reason.

[awm]

I dunno Ken... I'm not convinced that your answer here is much more useful than saying that it is utterly obvious to open the given hand with 1♣ showing 15+ any shape.

 

I mean, the question was clearly how to handle this hand under standard methods, where you have to pick a "least of evils." It is possible that rebidding 1♠ might be least of evils, but saying that partner will know you might have three spades because you have an agreement to bid like this with three spades is just dodging the question.

[Mbodell]

Playing standard methods I tend to often open 3145 1♣. I bid 2♦/1♦, 2♣/1♥, and 2♦/1♠ with hands that are about this strength when I open 1♣. On this particular hand though, with AKxx of diamonds and Axxxx of clubs my diamonds are enough stronger than my clubs that I'd probably open 1♦. Make the ♦K the ♣K and I'd be opening 1♣ for sure.

[the hog]

"That makes it no longer a "lie." Rather, the call actually shows this."

 

It actually shows 3-4 Spades. So you are saying that with 6/7C and 5S you open 1S? If your response shows exactly 3-4 S, that is what you are forced to do unless you have some weird jump or artificial bid at your dsiposal.

 

Further, Ken, thats fine if you and your partner have agreed to do this, but that doesn't provide a solution for the problem which a normal partnership would use. (I mean one using standard methods).

[jdonn]

I agree with Ken in that I don't know the point of saying "I don't believe in lying to my partner." Neither do I, but in standard methods (ignoring countries where rebidding the minor with 5 is 'standard') every opening/rebid after 1♥ is a lie. 1♠ shows four, 1NT shows a max of 14, 2♣ shows six, 2♦ shows more strength, 1♦/2♣ shows 5+ diamonds.

 

I don't like lying to partner either. But when every bid would be a lie, I just try to choose the best one.

[kenrexford]

"That makes it no longer a "lie." Rather, the call actually shows this."

 

It actually shows 3-4 Spades. So you are saying that with 6/7C and 5S you open 1S? If your response shows exactly 3-4 S, that is what you are forced to do unless you have some weird jump or artificial bid at your dsiposal.

 

Further, Ken, thats fine if you and your partner have agreed to do this, but that doesn't provide a solution for the problem which a normal partnership would use. (I mean one using standard methods).

OK, to be precise, it shows 4 spades and 5 clubs (although you can opt to lie with a 4-4 COV hand), or 3♠/5♣ precisely, or a 5♠/6♣ (or longer but always more clubs) wild two-suiter.

 

I thought that part would be obvious.

 

Furthermore, it does provide a solution for what a normal partnership would use. A normal partnership would (in theory) discuss this situation just like they would discuss when to raise a major with three-card support. If the approach of rebidding 1♠ makes theory sense, then it would be adopted.

 

Sure, a partnership who does not discuss this might not reach that solution. And, of all of the partnerships, many have not discussed this situation. However, all people now reading this post will be considering this situation and will likely discuss this with their partner. Hence, in the limited BBF pool, especially as to those who are reading this post, "normal" presumably now means "discussed."

[the hog]

"OK, to be precise, it shows 4 spades and 5 clubs (although you can opt to lie with a 4-4 COV hand), or 3♠/5♣ precisely, or a 5♠/6♣ (or longer but always more clubs) wild two-suiter."

 

So its forcing I assume. Again that is not what most people seem to play here, though I agree I prefer this.

 

"I thought that part would be obvious."

 

Not from what you posted.