up-the-line vs. 1c-1d-1h-1s

[Stephen Tu]

[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn=stephtu&s=SJ974HKQ73DJ6CAQ7&wn=Robot&w=SA853HA5DQ4CJT865&nn=Robot&n=SKQ62H986DKT832C9&en=Robot&e=STHJT42DA975CK432&d=w&v=o&b=8&a=PPP1C%28Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20!C%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%29P1D%28One%20over%20one%20--%204+%20!D%3B%2011-%20HCP%3B%206-12%20total%20points%29P1H%283+%20!C%3B%204+%20!H%3B%2011+%20HCP%3B%2012-18%20total%20point%29P1N%28Balanced%20minimum%20--%202-3%20!C%3B%204+%20!D%3B%202-3%20!H%3B%202-3%20!S%3B%206-10%20HCP%29PPP&p=H2HKHAH8CJC9C4CQS7S5SKSTS6D7SJSACTD2C2C7C8D3CKCADJDQDKDAHJHQH5H6S4S8SQH4S2C3S9S3D6D4DTD5D8D9H7C5HTH3C6H9]400|300[/hv]

 

I feel like up the line bidding and playing 1c-1d-1h-1s as 4th suit game forcing are incompatible. With most my partners I play 1s as 1 round force, but not to game, that can be sorted out later. With up-the-line I kind of feel it's mandatory to play this way.

 

Especially here with GIB a passed hand I think it can bid 1s naturally. Opener besides 4423 could also be 4414/4405.

[Bbradley62]

The fact that GIB selected a 1NT rebid whose description is inconsistent with his hand (it says "2-3♠" and "2-3♣") should be a clue that there's something wrong with the logic.

[mgoetze]

The best solution to this problem would of course be to teach GIB Walsh.

[iandayre]

Exactly. I posted on this a while ago. It is perfectly fine to play the 4th suit 1S as 3+ GF if playing Walsh. That is unplayable if you bid ♦ before a major over 1C.