Too many controls?

[jdonn]

It doesn't annoy me at all but it was great evidence you are old fashioned!

[andy_h]

If you think 2♦ being a reverse screws you more often than not, think about the times when you actually hold a reverse hand and you bid? If you load that in 2♣ rebid then that transfers the problem to partner, and if you bid 3♦, good luck to the rest of your auction! And also if you can bid 2♦ showing minimum, you are sometimes forcing your partial to an unnecessary level if responder prefers clubs.

[aguahombre]

well, three pages back I was convinced that 2D should be a reverse. Even those of us who open 1C with 2344 minimum can handle not bidding 2D on this auction. Pretending it went 1C (P) 1H (P) works just fine.

[the hog]

The other side of the coin:

xx

Kx

AKxx

Kxxxx

 

xxx

Axxx

QJxx

xx

 

1C (1S) X (P)

Would you rather play 2C or 2D? I don't think anyone would advocate a 1NT bid by opener.

If responder has only 4H he is likely to have D support or C support.

 

I don't care if you play 2D as a reverse or not, but I don't think anyone should assume it is standard.

[aguahombre]

open 1D or rebid 1NT? I would open 1D and rebid 2C...so that hand is out.

[the hog]

open 1D or rebid 1NT? I would open 1D and rebid 2C...so that hand is out. [/QU

 

Yes, so would I and therefore I also would avoid that problem. However lots who post here wouldn't open 1D and hate the bid.

 

The point I am making is that systems should be a cohesive unified whole. You have to look at the implications a bid might have on the rest of your system. So if you open 1C on that hand, you either have to bid an ugly 1NT or 2Cs after the sputnik double.

Too often posters here look at bids in isolation and make comments like "2D is a reverse". Well if I opened 1C on that hand then 2D would definitely NOT be a reverse. I am curious where Josh would end up on my example hand.

 

There is an old Latin saying "De gustibus no est disputandum".

[PhantomSac]

Your example hand is as usual pretty terrible. The opponents have 20 highs and 8 spades and have bid 1S, and you think you're going to get to play 2D? GL.

 

I wonder how on your example hands you would find 2D after 1C p 1H p ?

 

Of course you would not find 2D. That is because you don't always find the best contract in bridge, you try to maximize the chances that you do with priorities placed on games/slam/majors. Finding 2D can get lost in the shuffle sometimes.

 

The correct counter argument to 2D should be a reverse because 1C p 1H p 2D is a reverse is obviously that "that is a necessary evil in your system, but it doesn't mean you have to play that way after 1C 1S X p, even if X shows the same thing as 1H would, because in this auction you have a cuebid available whereas in 1C p 1H p you don't, and spade bids are natural."

 

The counter argument to that is "2S crowds your auction and is pretty generic, and it is also GF, so you are still in trouble with min reverse type hands that cannot show extras." Bidding 3D and forcing a preference to 4C with minimum reverses is pretty bad. Being able to show minimum 4-5 hand types might be useful, even though it forces a preference to 3C, because with minimum 4-5 hands, if partner is minimum also, they probably can make 2 of a major anyways.

 

Producing 2 hands where 2D is better than 1N where they are always bidding 2S anyways is a pretty dumb way to argue that 2D should show a minimum 4-5 though

[jdonn]

Since you are so interested I would rebid 1NT. As Justin says the opponents are almost sure to bid more spades anyway (or to have already done so).

 

I don't understand the point of your example anyway. Partner's spades and diamonds can just as easily be reversed. In fact that's the only one of the two cases where you will declare what you end up bidding anyway so it's the one that matters much more.

[the hog]

Your example hand is as usual pretty terrible. The opponents have 20 highs and 8 spades and have bid 1S, and you think you're going to get to play 2D? GL.

 

I wonder how on your example hands you would find 2D after 1C p 1H p ?

 

Of course you would not find 2D. That is because you don't always find the best contract in bridge, you try to maximize the chances that you do with priorities placed on games/slam/majors. Finding 2D can get lost in the shuffle sometimes.

 

The correct counter argument to 2D should be a reverse because 1C p 1H p 2D is a reverse is obviously that "that is a necessary evil in your system, but it doesn't mean you have to play that way after 1C 1S X p, even if X shows the same thing as 1H would, because in this auction you have a cuebid available whereas in 1C p 1H p you don't, and spade bids are natural."

 

The counter argument to that is "2S crowds your auction and is pretty generic, and it is also GF, so you are still in trouble with min reverse type hands that cannot show extras." Bidding 3D and forcing a preference to 4C with minimum reverses is pretty bad. Being able to show minimum 4-5 hand types might be useful, even though it forces a preference to 3C, because with minimum 4-5 hands, if partner is minimum also, they probably can make 2 of a major anyways.

 

Producing 2 hands where 2D is better than 1N where they are always bidding 2S anyways is a pretty dumb way to argue that 2D should show a minimum 4-5 though

Well it is also "pretty dumb" not to argue about the points I made. As a matter of fact I would find 2D, because as I stated, I would open that hand with 1D and rebid 2C.

Further it is also "pretty dumb" to always assume the opponents are going to do the right thing - you know as well as I do that sometimes they don't.

Fine, for you 2D is clearly a reverse; for me and for some others it is not. What you shouldn't do in a forum such as this is to assume that your ideas are the only ones that have any credibility

 

By the way, I take the point about 2S being available, but believe that that is better reserved for something else - perhaps a strong balanced hand without a S stopper?

 

Let me also ask you this: "How would you play 3D?" If as a mini splinter as one poster above mentioned, let me point out that that is far from standard practise.

 

To Josh, I think the 1NT rebid by opener is horrible!

[jdonn]

To Josh, I think the 1NT rebid by opener is horrible!

You gave me a hand you would open something else to avoid a rebid problem, then made me open what you wouldn't open and gave me an auction with the rebid problem, then told me my choice was horrible. Gee thanks!

[the hog]

To Josh, I think the 1NT rebid by opener is horrible!

You gave me a hand you would open something else to avoid a rebid problem, then made me open what you wouldn't open and gave me an auction with the rebid problem, then told me my choice was horrible. Gee thanks!

Fair comment.

[PhantomSac]

Fine, for you 2D is clearly a reverse; for me and for some others it is not. What you shouldn't do in a forum such as this is to assume that your ideas are the only ones that have any credibility

Lol. I guess you haven't read any of my posts in this thread. Here is a brief reminder; I have stated numerous times that I would expect few people to take 2D as a reverse, I believe I said less than 1 in 10 club players, and that you should never bid 2D with a pickup partner with a reverse as you will probably get passed. I suppose it's too much to ask you to read posts before making these comments though.

[gnasher]

The other side of the coin:

xx

Kx

AKxx

Kxxxx

 

xxx

Axxx

QJxx

xx

 

1C (1S) X (P)

Would you rather play 2C or 2D? I don't think anyone would advocate a 1NT bid by opener.

I would advocate a 1NT rebid by opener. It's what I was going to bid in the (for me) equivalent uncontested auction of 1♣-1♥. If we play there, partner will probably have four spades. And even if they run five spade tricks, that doesn't mean we're in the wrong contract.

[helene_t]

Should responder, after opener's 1NT rebid, check for a spade stopper on the way to 3NT? It wouldn't occur to me.

 

BTW if opps play Rozenkrants (sp?) redoubles, it is not so likely that their spades run if opener couldn't bid his spades twice (or make a 2♠ overcall), and advancer couldn't rdbl.

[Codo]

Hi Helene,

 

yes it is a common theme that you need to rebid 1 NT without a stopper and a balanced hand. In this case yes, partner should be aware and should ask.

[phil_20686]

There is an issue here that has not been discussed at all, which is the style of the 1c opener. If you play (as I do) that all balanced hands w/o 5cM open a club, even if you have 5 diamonds, then this is a legitamtey problematic auction. This is now a totally different problem from when 1c normally shows clubs. Do i really want to be forced to bid a nt with 2353 shape, or even 2-2-4-5, when i have not even shown my club suit yet?

 

In this situation I would tend to play that dble is just t/o. 1fter 1c-1s, after 1c-1d/h dble simple continues the transferwash style so

 

1c-1h-x = 4+ spades

1c-1h-1s = <4 spades.

 

After 1d(5+) 1s x there is obviously no problem and woudl play this as a pure negative double.

 

I think in this type of style 1c 1s x should not be made on hands that cannot play in 3c or 2d, and would often elect to bid a nt with 4-4-(32) shape and partner can check for the major himself if he wants to.

[helene_t]

No our 1♣ opening is standard except that we open 1♣ with 4=4=3=2.

[hotShot]

1♣ - 1♠ - ?

and you hold something like Qxxx AJxx xx xxx.

Partner can bid pass, dbl or 1NT.

If your agreement is that "dbl" shows ♥ and ♦, than you have to bid 1NT or pass.

If your agreement that "dbl" shows 4+ ♥, than you can make a different use of 1NT (e.g. stronger hands) and pass.

 

1♣ - 1♠ - X - p

?

Now if you play that openers 2♦ is a reverse (the logical choice ♣=>♦), than weaker hands have to bid 1[NT] even if they don't have a ♠ stopper.

If you want that 1NT promises a ♠ stopper, than you have to pass, rebid ♣, bid 2♥ with 3 card-support (if 3334) and 2♦ cannot show reverse strength.

 

In both cases your partnership has to pick it's poison.

 

Edited: Optimized using helene_t's input.

Edited February 4, 2010 by hotShot

[helene_t]

hoshot, nobody is arguing that 2♥ is a reverse, the whole point of playing negative doubles is to be able to find the 4-4 hearts fit even if opener is minimum. The uncontested auction 1♣-1♥-2♥ isn't a reverse either.

 

You won't have to rebid 2♣ on a 4-card suit. With 4-4 minors we open 1♦.

 

With 3334 the poison you pick is 2♥ if you have no spade stopper and 1NT promises one.

 

You have to pick your poison with (32)35 and no spade stopper, but that is true even if 2♦ were not a reverse. It is not very attractive to bid 2♦ on a 3-card if that isn't forcing. You could find yourself in a 3-3 fit. If you bid 2♥ on a 3-card at least you have a 4-3 fit.

 

So the only situation in which playing 2♦ as a non-reverse helps you is if you have 4♦5♣ and no spade stopper. I am not convinced that it helps you even in that case: 2♣ could easily be your best spot, you may play 1NT as not showing a spade stopper, or you may have opened 1♦ in the first place.

[PhantomSac]

Hi Helene,

 

In this auction more than any other auction in bridge it is "common" to rebid 1N without a stopper. Doing this maintains the integrity of all of your other rebids, and it is most likely the best thing to do with that hand type anyways. If you have say xx in spades, it is extremely likely partner has length and therefore a stopper in spades with RHO passing. Of course it is not 100 % or close, but it is very likely, and even if he doesn't you can still make 1N after losing the first 5.

[helene_t]

Thanks Justin.

 

But on this forum people like to raise with 3-card support whenever they have a small doubleton. Now we are talking about a small doubleton/trippleton in a suit which has been bid by LHO. Wouldn't those of you who would have raise a 1♥ bid on three with a particular also bid 2♥ on three in response to a neg dbl, holding the same hand?

[Lobowolf]

open 1D or rebid 1NT? I would open 1D and rebid 2C...so that hand is out. [/QU

 

Yes, so would I and therefore I also would avoid that problem. However lots who post here wouldn't open 1D and hate the bid.

 

The point I am making is that systems should be a cohesive unified whole.

Looking at it as a unified whole, it seems that you're making a further argument for why 2♦ is a reverse, by providing a minimum with 4 diamonds and 5 clubs and saying you'd open 1♦.

 

You say in a later post that if the doubler only has 4 hearts, he "usually has clubs or diamonds," which puts you in agreement with most of us Americans - responder does NOT promise diamonds. So what's the disagreement about what the double means?

 

Then in addition to the fact that responder doesn't promise diamonds (even if he "usually has" one of the minors), there's the further inference that with a minimum 4-5, you'd open 1♦. So when instead you open 1♣, we can rule that nice 2-2-4-5 13-count out - must have extras. But I suspect that I'm oversimplifying your minor suit opening choices and there must be some hands in between a 13-count and a reverse that you'd open 1♣ with 4-5 in the minors.

[PhantomSac]

Thanks Justin.

 

But on this forum people like to raise with 3-card support whenever they have a small doubleton. Now we are talking about a small doubleton/trippleton in a suit which has been bid by LHO. Wouldn't those of you who would have raise a 1♥ bid on three with a particular also bid 2♥ on three in response to a neg dbl, holding the same hand?

Someone once told me that they didn't think it could work if opener could bid 2H with 3, and responder could make a neg X with 3, even if both of those were rare, not really because you might play a 3-3 fit (two rare things happening at once is extremely rare obv), but because it was too much to sort out later (for instance, which partner can compete to 3H over 2S if both might have 3?)

 

I think if you will never make a negative X in this auction with the "problem" hand types that have 3 hearts like xxx KQx Axxx Jxx or whatever, it is fine to bid 2H with hands that you would raise 1m p 1H p 2H with, and probably most hands with xx spades will be included. I still think it would be wrong to be bidding 2H with xxx spades though, your reasoning for bidding 2H rather than 1N shouldn't be that you lack a spade stopper, it should be that you think 2H will be a better partial than 1N usually based on your worthless doubleton.

[Dirk Kuijt]

FWIW, I found this on the Bridge World site as part of the description of Bridge World Standard:

 

http://www.bridgeworld.com/default.asp?d=b...=bwsall.html#VE

 

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

[aguahombre]

dirk...all that shows is that BWS is not represented here, and if they ever revise it, they might consider other logic.

 

This is a discussion of why people treat certain things in certain ways....dogmatic is quoting someone else, without thinking