1m-(1H)-?

[Little Kid]

I've seen a few different treatments of the auction: 1♣/♦-(1♥)-?

 

a ) 1S 5+♠ and dbl with 4♠ (+ some other hands like BAL hands with no stopper)

b ) dbl 4+♠ and 1♠ showing 0-3♠

c ) 1♠ natural with 4+♠, leaving double open for a lot of other hands

 

The standard treatment at least with most of the people I play with seems to be a). Though b ) or c ) definitely seem more sound theoretically in my mind at least, which is probably why conventions like b ) exist. What do you play and what do you think is the best way to play it? Are there any big differences between b ) and c )?

[Hanoi5]

I play a and I like C more than b, but I bet b is more appealing to experimental people, i.e. what hrothgar would play.

[andy_h]

This has been thoroughly discussed from past threads and there's a d) which gnasher plays which tries to cater for 5(+)♠'s and varying strengths (in conjunction with other transfer bids like 2♥). The reasoning behind this is because when the auction gets competitive (say 4th seat raises the ante with 3 or 4♥) it can be very beneficial to show your 5+spades on your first bid.

 

Having said that, it also makes more sense to play some form of b ) or c) if you play short club because you won't be able to compete with 2♣ as often as you like whereas you can compete with 2♦ if 1♦ promises 4. Because of this, I like to play b ) opposite a short club (well rather X=4-5♠ and 1♠=0-3♠) and revert to a) opposite a 4+1♦ opening.

[awm]

Prefer B to C. The main reason is that this gets opener to declare the spade contracts, putting overcaller on lead (usually good, since overcaller's partner has an easy lead of the overcall suit). There are some slight differences in allowing opener's 1♠ bid (in B, opener can bid 1♠ with for example three-card support to clarify length in an uncontested auction; in C opener can bid 1♠ on four cards and potentially reach a 4-3 spade fit) but advancer bids fairly often anyway and I don't think this is a big deal. I do think it's right to play some additional ways to show spades (like 2♥ cue showing 6+♠) to clarify some of the lengths/ranges too.

 

However, using "standard" opening methods I think A is actually the best. Most of the "takeout without four spades" hands can raise opener's minor or bid notrump or are best off to pass anyway; you are only really stuck with a 5332 hand including five in the unbid minor and doubleton heart, which is a single hand type. If you play a short club or diamond there are a lot more awkward hands (because you don't really want to raise into a 4-2 fit) and in such partnerships I play B.

[OleBerg]

If you play unbalanced 1♦:

 

1♣ - (1♥) - ???

 

X = Spades

1♠ = Diamonds, 6+

2♣ = Clubs, 6-9

2♦ = Unbalanced club raise, invite+

2♥ = Balanced club raise, invite+

 

seems to work ok. (In a weak-NT context.)

[peachy]

I play usually a) unless b ) agreed. Clearly prefer b ) over c ).

[aguahombre]

Awm makes a nice case, and certainly being able to differentiate between holding 4 spades and 5+ spades can be very important at this early stage of the auction.

 

But when partner has opened, say 1♣, we have found many hands where we wanted to respond 1♦, 1NT, or even 1♥ --and the 1♥ overcall would have eliminated our ability to show a response at all (no heart stopper). So we like "C", but understand why lots of people don't. "b" would work also, but doesn't gain on the 4+ vs 5+ problem, so we stay simple.

[gnasher]

Prefer (d)

[aguahombre]

Yes, "d" is workable. We could use some insufficient bids or a BIT NT to cover the awkward hands.

[jjbrr]

b for me

[ArtK78]

I prefer c, but most players that I play with play a, so I am usually stuck with a.

[neilkaz]

Almost everyone I play with does A but I think C may be superior.

[jdonn]

Yes (a) is standard in the US. I also prefer (d), or what I think is meant by it.

[gnasher]

I think there are lots of (d)s. The one I play is:

double = 4 spades any strength, or 5 < invitational, or 5 bad invitational

1♠ and higher = transfer

2♥ = 6 spades any strength, or 5 game-forcing

2♠ = 5 spades invitational

 

I'm not sure how serious aquahombre's comment was, but I don't have a problem with awkward hands: I bid 1♠, transfer to notrumps, followed by anything that isn't a cue-bid. That shows a (not very well-defined) awkward hand.

[gszeszycki]

"A" centers on the spade suit because the other major is usually the easiest game to reach. Knowing responder has (or denies) 5 spades makes opening bidders job a ton easier. In situations where the HCP are balanced knowing there is (or is not) a trump fit makes a huge difference on how the bidding should proceed. The very simplicity of "A" is another reason why it is so popular.

Following the support with support dogma is just plain a whole ton easier if the other major can be defined right from the start.

[Free]

A is standard, I usually play B. I also think B is better than C for finding 4-4 and 5-3 fits, rightsiding contracts,...

[whereagles]

Where I live most people play a). I actually prefer, and play, c).

[aguahombre]

I think there are lots of (d)s.  The one I play is:

double = 4 spades any strength, or 5 < invitational, or 5 bad invitational

1♠ and higher = transfer

2♥ = 6 spades any strength, or 5 game-forcing

2♠ = 5 spades invitational

 

I'm not sure how serious aquahombre's comment was, but I don't have a problem with awkward hands: I bid 1♠, transfer to notrumps, followed by anything that isn't a cue-bid.  That shows a (not very well-defined) awkward hand.

the comment about (d) was, of course, not serious at all. Was under the impression, since you didn't define (d) at the time, you weren't serious either. Now I know what your (d) is.

 

I just looked at all the CC's submitted early for the trials teams. None of them clarify a neg double of 1H in the upper left portion of the CC, except Doub/Wilz --who make it clear that it shows exactly 4 spades.

 

Either the rest of them assume (A) is obvious, or they just fail to state the variation on their card. Will be watching with interest on Vugraph to see what they really do.

[the hog]

I play C and prefer B

[kgr]

I play B.

We also play t-Walsh and they go logically together

[david_c]

In standard methods, slight preference for A. As I see it, the point of A is specifically to guard against a heart raise from LHO, which happens very frequently on this auction. Distinguishing between 4- and 5-card spade suits helps opener know whether to compete over 3♥ (say).

 

If you have neither 4 spades nor enough support to raise partner, there is not so much urgency since your hand is more defensive. Yes it would be nice to have a call to show this type of hand, but it feels right to give a higher priority to the hands where we can anticipate having to make a difficult competitive decision later.

 

If we play a 1♦ opening that shows "real" length (say 1♦ = 4+ unbalanced or 5♦332) then A becomes even better since we can happily raise on 3 cards, which takes care of most of the problem hands.

 

Whereas, after a short/multi-way 1♣ it's much less attractive: you've lost most of your raises, which makes any minor-suit oriented hand harder to bid, and many of these are important to compete with. So there I'd go for C, or come up with some structure specifically designed for this auction.

[Cascade]

To me it seems b/ or c/ (or d/) must be superior to a/. We play b/.

 

a/ seems theoretically unsound in that you use the two cheapest calls to both show the same suit. This leaves no bid for hands with some useful values and without that suit and without support and without a stopper in the opponents suit. This is not just 5332 hands but many 4333 hands and 4432 with four small in the opponents suit as well as other distributions with length 5+ in the unbid suit 5431, 5422, and with standard methods (not negative free bids) six-card suits with up to 8 or 9 useful points.

 

The value of being able to show useful values is when the opponents preempt and partner has a distributional hand when it makes it easier for partner to judge to take another bid or bid on to game knowing that there are useful values opposite.

[hanp]

Dbl = 4+ spades, "constructive" when 6+.

2H = either 6+ spades at least invitational, or 5+ spades GF.

2S = weak with spades (about 0-6).