Response to 1H

[squealydan]

I've just started playing 2 over 1 after years as an Acol 4-card-major-er.

 

Was playing with a better, and more experienced player than me, and I was surprised by one of his bids.

 

Sitting south, I opened 1H, pass from west, and my partner held :

 

♠ Q.9.6.4

♥ A.8.3

♦ 9.5.2

♣ 7.6.4

 

We have agreed that truly minimal hands with 3-card support may reply 1NT then give preference back to 2M, so 1M-2M tends to show a little bit of promise.

 

Just wondered what folk would reply with these cards?

[lipeng2076]

this is 4333 minimal hands with 3 cards sup，just reply 1nt then give preference back to 2h

[Antrax]

2♥ for me.

[gwnn]

2H please, you even have an ace!

 

1NT then 2H is for hands that are weaker than this, the purpose being to discourage partner from bidding on while also discouraging opponents to interfere (in comparison to just passing over 1H that is). 1S then 2H is for similar hands but I think works best if you have 5 spades (then you can find a better fit).

[SteveMoe]

I would reply 1N. 10 losers and 6 HCP do not measure up to 8-9 losers and 7-9 HCP for a constructive simple raise.

[kgr]

1NT seems to correspond to your agreements.

(We play this the same, but 1NT non-forcing and can even do it with a 5c♠)

[Codo]

When I played this style, my limit for 2 ♥ was 8+, so this had been an easy 1♠ or 1 NT response with a later preference.

But why do you ask us? You need your own agreement, this is not really a judgement call, but a definition of the lower limit of a good raise.

[P_Marlowe]

Raise.

 

4333 is certainly a reason to downgrade, but ..., make your life simple.

 

If you dont want to bid 2H, ... go with 1S.

 

Also you may consider switching to a forcing NT response.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[MickyB]

This is definitely too weak for 1H:2H in my book. I'd bid 1NT forcing if possible, or 1S if playing a semi-forcing NT. The disadvantage to 1S is that partner will raise on 35(14) minima.

[Mbodell]

My rule of thumb is to bid 1M-2M there has to be some game try you'd accept (some suit, either shortness or length). Would you accept a short suit game try in a minor (or some other game try)? If yes, bit 2♥, if no bid 1nt..2♥.

[PhilKing]

Clear 1NT response under your partner's guidelines (did he break his own rule?). It's a style I like, but it's just a matter of agreement - there is no right and wrong here.

[Phil]

1N.

 

Flip my ♠Q and ♥A and I'd consider 2♥.

[squealydan]

Thanks all for the replies.

 

I understand the rationale for 1NT rather than 2H. But I was surprised partner (and everyone here) just ignored 1♠. If partner is fairly minimal, a possible spade fit will get lost if I don't bid it now. I always thought it was better to be in a 4-4 fit than a 5-3?

[chasetb]

When your partner shows 5+ ♥, it's pretty unlikely that (s)he also have 4+ Spades. You may have an Ace, but you only have 6 HCP, and you have the worst shape in a 4333. Let's not get partner too excited, that is why I would bid 1NT then give preference via 2♥.

[billw55]

I hate 4333, so much that I automatically subtract 1 point for this.

 

I would use whatever sequence is the most discouraging in your methods. In mine I would bid 2♥; at least this way partner knows I have three. But the real answer is whatever you and your partner agree on.

[the hog]

2H. You have a fit so show it! I hate this style where you bid 1NT on this hand as i really think you are playing 2 handed Bridge..

[neilkaz]

2H. You have a fit so show it! I hate this style where you bid 1NT on this hand as i really think you are playing 2 handed Bridge..

I am definately no fan of this constructive raise treatment either, but given the system the OP is playing, the 6 HCP 4333 hand is a clear minimum with no interest in accepting a game try so he should start with a forcing NT and then bid 2♥.

 

I'd not want to bid 1♠ and then 2♥ as it could sound too encouraging.

[Stephen Tu]

I understand the rationale for 1NT rather than 2H. But I was surprised partner (and everyone here) just ignored 1♠. If partner is fairly minimal, a possible spade fit will get lost if I don't bid it now. I always thought it was better to be in a 4-4 fit than a 5-3?

 

It's not *always* better to be in a 4-4 fit than 5-3. It's *sometimes* better. And less often at the partial level, because some of the constructions for more tricks in the 4-4 fit involve discarding losers on the long cards of the 5-3 fit. At the partial level, the opponents rate to have already taken their side suit winners so there isn't anything useful left to discard by the time you've drawn trumps and established the 5 cd suit.

 

Furthermore, a lot of 5 cd major players like to raise 1s to 2s on *three* cards fairly often, especially with 35(14) minimums. This often works better when partner does have 5 spades, and if not the 4-3 often plays fairly well. But if this is the case, then responding 1s on a weak hand with 4-3 in the majors has now landed you in a 4-3 fit when you had a 5-3 fit available. Because of this, most 5cd major players, at least in America, ignore spades holding heart support, unless invitational+ strength, so that you can offer hearts again if partner raises. Also raising directly is more encouraging than a preference after 1h-1s-2c-2h, although that's more of a factor with the 8-9 pt hands rather than this bad 4333 6 count.

[lycier]

As to this hand,I always bid forcing 1nt firstly ,and then rebid 2♠ is my plan.