A Hand to Evaluate

[Echognome]

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sa98752hak2dktcqt]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

What's your plan, in particular over partner's most likely response of 1NT?

[gwnn]

A nice maximum for 1S then 2S.

 

If I had hearts maybe I'd have opened 1NT, something I've never tried before :)

 

with a little more juice on the side I'd try 2NT.

[kenrexford]

I'd not kick partner out of his seat for 1NT.

[jjbrr]

1♠ and rebid 2♠. The suit isnt great. I have some Hx's.

 

I suspect the outcome will be another good argument in favor of Gazilli?

[jdonn]

Gazilli shmilli vanilli, this is a good argument for precision et al.

[PhantomSac]

I open 1N with this type of hand personally. In fact, I've gotten 3 bad results in a row from doing that lately, but I press on...hehe. I did used to get good results doing this so variance obv.

 

If I opened 1S it would definitely be with the plan of rebidding 2N vul at imps, I cannot stomach 1S then 2S and missing a game. I mean, my partners routinely pass with 10 and a stiff spade, maybe I just open light when I have 6 spades? I think partner being in the 8-10 range and passing (not all 10s, but many) is just too big of a risk.

 

Ofc I will get to game opp 7 and maybe 6 if I rebid 2N, which is why I open 1N hehe...

[Fluffy]

this is the forums! why ain't people rebidding a natural 2♣? :P

 

if partner has 2 spades its best to bid 3♠ or 2♣ (raising to 3♠) since he will put us in a better spot than 2NT

 

if partner has 3 spades anything seems to work, maybe 2NT a bit better

 

if partner has 1 spade 3♠ is gonna work very poorly, since we will play 4♠ very often (singleton spade honnor 4/3!), and between the contracts of 3NT and 2♣, I think 2♣ will make more often, but 3NT wins a bigger pot.

 

..........

 

 

And now I realise 2NT helps us find the 5-3 heart fit!, all in all it is close, but I think I'd rather overbid to 3NT than play a silly 2♣, so 2NT.

[nigel_k]

We're too good to open 1♠ and rebid 2♠ vul at IMPS. 1♠ and raise 1NT to 2NT is clearly inferior to opening 1NT because it's off on both shape and values while the 1NT opening is only off on shape. 1♠ and rebid 3♠ is the beginner bid but we're not in that forum.

 

So of the listed choices, only a 1NT opening appeals. I would happily rebid a three card minor with this type but sadly don't have one. On a scale of 1 to 10, how insane is it to want to rebid 2♥ on this?

[rogerclee]

1♠ and raise 1NT to 2NT is clearly inferior to opening 1NT because it's off on both shape and values while the 1NT opening is only off on shape.

If you told me partner had 3 or more spades, I would definitely open 1S.

[jdonn]

Ok I'll put in the vote for 1♠ then 2♣. If partner passes I don't even think it's usually bad (in my case he knows I can have a doubleton anyway). I like bart so if partner has a weak preference I will score really well to be in 2♠. And bonus if we belong in hearts! Plus it just sticks with my motto, if I don't know what to do I make the cheapest bid if possible.

[vang]

another vote for 1♠ ... 2♣.

[Free]

Light side or Dark side? ;)

 

If light, then 1♠ followed by 2NT

If dark, Gazzillèèèh!!

[karlson]

I've tried this kind of 1n once or twice, and I don't recall any good results from it.

 

I like the arguments for the 2c rebid, especially if playing that it can systemically be 2.

[gwnn]

Ok I'll put in the vote for 1♠ then 2♣. If partner passes I don't even think it's usually bad (in my case he knows I can have a doubleton anyway). I like bart so if partner has a weak preference I will score really well to be in 2♠. And bonus if we belong in hearts! Plus it just sticks with my motto, if I don't know what to do I make the cheapest bid if possible.

isnt bart just gazzilli lite?

 

2C by opener=ostensibly natural (but cannot be a gameforcing hand like in gazz.)

2D by responder=semipositive (but maybe it's a bit more specific, i.e. promises hearts?)

?

 

If you're gonna say no gazzilli you should not reintroduce a lite version instead. If you don't play any artificial calls over the forcing nt I fail to see how 2C improves our chances of finding a good contract.

[jdonn]

Ok I'll put in the vote for 1♠ then 2♣. If partner passes I don't even think it's usually bad (in my case he knows I can have a doubleton anyway). I like bart so if partner has a weak preference I will score really well to be in 2♠. And bonus if we belong in hearts! Plus it just sticks with my motto, if I don't know what to do I make the cheapest bid if possible.

isnt bart just gazzilli lite?

 

2C by opener=ostensibly natural (but cannot be a gameforcing hand like in gazz.)

2D by responder=semipositive (but maybe it's a bit more specific, i.e. promises hearts?)

?

 

If you're gonna say no gazzilli you should not reintroduce a lite version instead. If you don't play any artificial calls over the forcing nt I fail to see how 2C improves our chances of finding a good contract.

2♣ is natural (that it could be on a doubleton is just my preference and has nothing in particular to do with bart), only the 2♦ bid is bart. And the 2♦ bid doesn't say anything about strength, it is a relay to show various different types of hands. So one is a convention by opener and one by responder. They don't even live in the same town. ;)

[fred]

I would open 1NT. A relatively close second choice would be to open 1S and rebid 2NT. For me there is no third choice.

 

I am currently serving on an ACBL committee that has been given the fun task of figuring out a way to deal with, among other things, rascals like me who sometimes open 1NT with "unusual hands".

 

The reason I mention this is that one of the other members of the committee, Jeff Meckstroth (who is obviously about as good a player as one might ever hope to find), mentioned in a conference call the other day that he would never open 1NT with a 6-card major. He seemed serious about the "never".

 

I found that rather strange. I will make a point to ask Jeff how he bids hands like this one the next time I see him. I am guessing he would open 1S and rebid 2NT - in my experience it is very much not the Meckwell style to underbid their HCPs (ie open 1S and rebid 2S), to rebid in a 2-card suit (ie open 1S and rebid 2C), or to jump rebid with a weak suit and a notrump-oriented hand (ie open 1S and rebid 3S). Given Jeff's "never", 1S then 2NT is all that is left.

 

Of course Jeff never has this problem playing his preferred (Precision) methods.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[gwnn]

Jdonn: Just to make sure I understand, you are saying 2D doesn't show 8 hcp? If not, what does it show? If it doesn't show any specific strength, what are the "various different hands" it shows? in the variant you like.

[jdonn]

Jdonn: Just to make sure I understand, you are saying  2D doesn't show 8 hcp? If not, what does it show? If it doesn't show any specific strength, what are the "various different hands" it shows? in the variant you like.

The way I play it requests opener (on most normal/minimum hands) to bid 2♥ which might be passed. So responder might be signing off in hearts with any strength. Also responder could be going back to spades with one range of spade preference, with the direct preference showing the other range (0-7 and 8-10 or so, arranged either way you want). Higher bids than that do all show 8+, actually more like 10+ ;) If you particularly care I play 2NT a normal 2NT bid with 4 card club support, 3♣ a stronger raise than directly, 3♦ natural (another potentially weak hand!), 3♥ natural and invitational with 2 spades, and 3♠ as a 3 card limit raise (can differentiate any way you want from 3♠ last round. One suggesting 3NT, one minimum and one maximum, etc).

[Echognome]

For what it's worth, we play semi-forcing 1NT, so 2♣ would show 4+ in our system. That left me from bidding 2♣. I didn't foresee that possibility as an option, so glad I included "Other" in the poll (yet no one has voted for it).

 

I chose 1♠ rebid 2NT. I asked one of our opponents (it was a friendly game on BBO), who said it was a tough hand and he'd choose 1NT. I thought that was an interesting choice, so included that in the polls.

 

Partner had:

 

♠J4

♥JT854

♦J5

♣A974

 

We played in 4♥ (the wrong way up) and went one off when partner misguessed diamonds (which was quite understand since opening leader underlead his Ace at trick 1).

[Echognome]

<snip>I will make a point to ask Jeff how he bids hands like this one the next time I see him.</snip>

If you do and don't mind sharing, I would be interested to know.

[Phil]

On the record for 1N, but I'm closer to 1♠...1N...2♠ than 1♠...1N...2N.

 

Clarsen rebids 2♠.

[andy_h]

I'd open this 1♠ and worry about my rebid later. Who knows, maybe partner has spade support or maybe the opponents interfere so I may not need to face a rebid opposite an uncontested 1NT. If that scenario does indeed come, I think I will rebid 2♣.

[Little Kid]

1♠ and 2♣ rebid here too, not happy to upgrade this to a 2N rebid over 1N. Still have a few descriptive options left after partner responds to 2♣.

[aguahombre]

1S then 2S if not using 2C or 2NT as a gadget seems fine, and not ready to revise our whole rebid structure to add 2C and 2NT as gadgets. Will miss some 25 or 26 point games, and that might be a good thing.

[nige1]

We're too good to open 1♠ and rebid 2♠ vul at IMPS. 1♠ and raise 1NT to 2NT is clearly inferior to opening 1NT because it's off on both shape and values while the 1NT opening is only off on shape. 1♠ and rebid 3♠ is the beginner bid but we're not in that forum. So of the listed choices, only a 1NT opening appeals. I would happily rebid a three card minor with this type but sadly don't have one. On a scale of 1 to 10, how insane is it to want to rebid 2♥ on this?

I agree. Ely Culbertson's Principle of Preparedness accords with a 1N opener.