Beginer question of WJ 2005

[frank0]

I am trying to learn WJ 2005 recently, after looking at the text online I just tried to practice on BBO with myself(with 2 different id) and the following hand came up.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sq86ht97dqt72cat4&n=saj3hqdak954ckq86&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1cp1dp1sp1np3nppp]266|200[/hv]

 

North had 19HCP therefore open 1C. South, even with 8 HCP but no 4 card major resposed 1D.

 

I cannot find a proper bid for North now, 2D is GF, 1NT lie the shape to partner, 3D looks like overbidding so I chose to bid better major, 1S.

 

The bidding went as the diagram shown and ended up in the wrong contract.

 

Which bid was wrong?

 

(by the way can anyone tell me how to edit the title of post?)

[Free]

I think South should've bid 1NT showing 8-10(11) instead of 1♦. Then opener can bid 2♦ GF.

[frank0]

In WJ 2005 1NT shows good 8-11 and opener can invite 3NT with flat 14 count.

 

This hand may qualify as a good 8 hand but similar problem can comes up when we substitute all T in South's hand by small cards, or substitute ♦Q by♦J.

[Free]

Ah ok, apparently 1NT shows 9-11 according to the file, so 1♦ is ok...

 

Not sure if it's described in the file, but what is 1♣-1♦-3♣/♦?

[frank0]

Copy from the text

 

Other 2-level bids, and 3-level minor rebids

The remaining rebids at the 2-level (over a negative 1♦) are natural and show a strong club with at least 5 cards in the suit bid. Same thing holds for a bid of a minor at the 3-level.

 

It seems like rebid 3♦ by opener is a choice, but with that crappy hand and partner does not promise anything this bid looks awkward to me.

[Free]

It seems like rebid 3♦ by opener is a choice, but with that crappy hand and partner does not promise anything this bid looks awkward to me.

Indeed, but it is what you need to bid apparently. 2♦ is GF, you don't have that. So 3♦ it is. Makes sense though, because strong hands want more room for bidding, so a jump is weaker. But doing it on a 5 card suit seems dangerous to say the least. I would probably just rebid 1NT showing around 18-20 balanced. It gets my strength across and is relatively safe (unless partner signs off in 2♥ ofcourse).

[mgoetze]

Generally, strong diamond hands are kind of an afterthought. There are various solutions, such as not playing 1[cl[-1♦-2♦ as randomg GF, or a 2♦ opening showing a weak 2 in hearts or a decent hand with diamonds, etc.

 

Personally, I agree with just rebidding 1NT on this hand.

[Zelandakh]

There is another option: 1C - 1D; 1S - 1NT; 2D. Admittedly we are really showing 4+ spades but this seems to be the only way of showing the heart defect on this hand without jumping into the stratosphere.

[the hog]

There is another option as well which certain Polish pairs are using. That is to make the upper limit for the 1D opening a little stronger - up to abut 18-19.

On this hand and not playing that, I would bid 3D.

[mycroft]

Warning: don't speak Polish Club, just play several strong and two-way Club systems.

 

But if people are saying that this is too ugly a hand to treat systemically as a "strong hand, 5+diamonds", then it shouldn't be too strong to open 1♦. If that means hiding a jack, oh well.

 

Having said that, strong hands with both minors are hard to describe in almost any system, deliberately, as a cost of making more lucrative hands easier to describe.

[mgoetze]

But if people are saying that this is too ugly a hand to treat systemically as a "strong hand, 5+diamonds", then it shouldn't be too strong to open 1♦. If that means hiding a jack, oh well.

 

No, we're just saying that "strong hand, 5+ diamonds" is a hand type which isn't handled very well by stock Polish Club.

[semeai]

Your options:

 

1) Open 1D instead.

2) Rebid 1S.

3) Rebid 1NT.

4) Rebid 3D.

 

Each of these is potentially correct on some 3-1-5-4 19-count. Here I think given that I have the ♥Q, I'll just rebid 1NT.

 

Item (2) is less terrible than it sounds. Many play this as only promising 3 with the 12-14 balanced hand (it depends what you bid with 3-2 in the majors and 12-14), so partner is unlikely to hang you. The downside is that you may play a 3-3 fit (or, rarely, worse) opposite a broke partner.

 

Added: On the actual hand, given that you bid 1S, I think you should follow-up with 2D, not 3NT. This shows the strong type, ostensibly 5-4 either way in spades and diamonds.

[semeai]

How should you bid over 1C-1D;1S-1N;2D? What is forcing?

 

One of Matula's examples is the sequence 1C-1D;1H-1N;2D, 5-4 reds either way, and he mentions that 2S (which he strangely calls "the fourth-suit") is an artificial force thereafter. Here with 1C-1D;1S-1N;2D it seems less likely you'd still play 2H as an artificial force: maybe it's needed for a random 5 card suit in a weak hand.

[Tomi2]

before Jassem came up with his wj05 thing one could easily respond 1nt with that normal 8 count. now the 1d response can have those 7-8 balanced hands among all others that make game with the strong 1c opener, but its more frequent now that game still is on, so both have to worry.

1♣-1♦-1M becomes ugly when you hold 8hcp with 3 card support in partner major, you could well have 28hcp and an 8 card fit (seldom 9) or 20 and 3-3 in this suit... so you try to find one more bid. but then again with good 5 or 6 points you would also want to bid one more time. imo this leads to some unconfortable spots

 

for this hand: i would open this 1♦ and strech the 1♦ openers to 21 in polish club. you get your suit in befor opps or partner can preempt you and as you see, partners preempts start with a 1d response

[rhm]

This is not an easy hand to bid in WJ 2005. I happen to think that the first 4 bids are good bids. I prefer 1♦ to 1NT. The 1♠ rebid is certainly much better than 3♦.

However 2♣ is an alternative to 1♠. I prefer 1♠, even though I promise 4 cards there.

The 3NT bid, however, is lazy and poor opposite a weak hand with probably less than 4 cards in ♥.

 

What is the rush over 1NT, when every further bid by opener, with the exception of Pass and 2♣, will show the strong hand?

In particular ♦ bids must be strong, because of the failure to open 1♦ in WJ 2005. The bidding might go:

 

1♣--1♦

1♠--1NT

2♦--2♠ (forcing for one round when opener is 18+)

3♣--4♦ (good hand in context)

5♦

 

Opener has not enough to invite slam over 4♦. If he would be stronger (say the ♠K instead of the ♠J) opener would invite with 4♥ or bid the slam directly.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

before Jassem came up with his wj05 thing one could easily respond 1nt with that normal 8 count. now the 1d response can have those 7-8 balanced hands among all others that make game with the strong 1c opener, but its more frequent now that game still is on, so both have to worry.

1♣-1♦-1M becomes ugly when you hold 8hcp with 3 card support in partner major, you could well have 28hcp and an 8 card fit (seldom 9) or 20 and 3-3 in this suit... so you try to find one more bid. but then again with good 5 or 6 points you would also want to bid one more time. imo this leads to some unconfortable spots

 

I personally like to play the 1NT response even a point higher than Jassem, a hand which wants to invite opposite the weak notrump. I do not wrong-side notrump oppsite the strong hand and I can stop in 1NT oppsite the weak notrump when I have an invitational hand.

 

Where is the problem and where does it get uncomfortable?

My experience is that partner will bid again anyway with 5+ after the 1♦ response, usually 1NT if balanced.

So where do you gain with a wider range notrump response to 1♣?

If opener takes another bid (except in ♣) after 1NT rebid he shows the strong hand.

In Wjo5 opener can always force and show 18+ by bidding ♦ on the third round, since the failure to open 1♦ marks him with the strong hand now.

 

So the bidding starts:

 

1♣-1♦

1♠-1NT

 

2♣ intermediate plus, 4♠, longer ♣ not forcing

2♦ 18+, usually with a ♦ suit, forcing

2♥ 18+ at least 4♥s, longer ♠s

2♠ 18+ at least 5 ♠s

2NT invitational, balanced 18-19

 

any higher bid shows good suits, game forcing now.

 

Rainer Herrmann