Another inversion

[Gerben42]

After an opening bid of 1 in a minor, I tried switching the responses 1♥ and 1♠. If you then add 1m - 1♥ - 1♠ shows 4-card ♥ without fit in ♠ you have the same situation as before but with the majors inverted.

 

The advantage is that when you have hearts that they have one call less. This is traded for one extra possible call when you have spades, in which case you don't mind less, the net effect being positive.

 

Has anyone tried this? I know that the Dutch open team plays something like this but they seem to play 1♣ - 1♥ - 1♠ as support. If so, how do they find a ♥ fit with both majors?

 

I'd be grateful for any comments.

[david_c]

I can see an advantage of this if you add extra hand types to 1♥. For example, some people use 1♦:1♥ as either natural or relay. This might be improved by playing 1♦:1♥ as either spades or relay, and 1♦:1♠ as hearts. Becuase then after, say, 1♦:1♥,2♣, your next relay is 2♥, whereas if 1♥ could be natural you might like to have a natural 2♥ available, so you'd need to play 2♠ as relay. The inversion gains a step here.

[bestguru]

I like the idea. What are the other responses to 1m - 1♥. Specifically what do 1nt and 2♥ mean?

[han]

Are you sure that the Dutch team plays this, and not transfer responses to 1C?

[Gerben42]

Yes I'm sure. It was in the Bridge magazine at some point.

The other responses are the same as if you would have bid the suit you have, i.e.

1♣ - 1♥ - 2♥ = Reverse with 5♣ and 4♥. 1NT = no 4-card major and balanced (12 - 14).

[joker_gib]

Hi Gerben !

 

So, 1m - 1♠ = hearts !

 

How does opener do to show 4♠ and a minimum hand !?!? :)

 

Alain

[Fluffy]

That's were you lose I supose, you may lose the spade fit when responder has 4♠ and 5♥, and openenr will have to rebid a 5 card suit when he has 4♠+5m.

 

The advantages are huge as well, making the correct hand to declare most cases.

 

The idea over 1♦ is interesting, but after 1♣ transfer advances (1♦=4+♥, 1♥ 4+♠, 1♠ 4+♦ or balanced with ♣) are better IMO.

[MickyB]

So, 1m - 1♠ = hearts !

 

How does opener do to show 4♠ and a minimum hand !?!? :unsure:

Presumably the same thing as opener would do with 4♥ and a minimum hand after the natural auction 1m - 1♠!

 

Jansma-Verhees played 1m:2♥ as flannery in Malmo. Nothing on their card about openers rebid after 1m:1M that I can see. They probably couldn't play full transfer responses to 1♣ because it is Polish.

 

I guess the inversion should show a small advantage. It will place the stronger hand as declarer more frequently, and at the 1 level it is less safe to show a suit by doubling than by bidding.

[Free]

I've played this several years, based on Misho's inverted Majors.

 

Here's how we played it:

1m - ?

 

1♥ = 4+♠, can have any longer suit

1♠ = 4+♥, no 4♠

 

After 1m-1♥, opener rebids 1♠ with a 4 card ♥. This way you won't lose the ♥ fit, and responder can make his hand very clear. You have 4th suit forcing, if you "rebid" your major you show (5)6 cards, and if the bidding goes

1m-1♥*

1NT-2♥

it shows canapé (5+♥ and 4♠).

 

It worked out great if you play checkback and other stuff. Perhaps some example hands may give a clearer view on the subject, but I'm too lazy to look for some :unsure:

[Brandal]

The advantages are huge as well, making the correct hand to declare most cases.

Won't your contract be "wronghanded" from everyone

who bids natural?

 

If both hands are about same strength give or take,

which usually is the case after 1m-1M and you end up

in say 4M?

 

Who's to say which hand is right for declaring?

 

I remember Roland saying in a vugraph "debate" where

some commentators meant bidding game was almost clearcut

or at least bidding to 3 level.

Roland said switch defenders hands,and 3 is down,which

leads me to the "definition" that there is no way of knowing

which hand is correct to declare,any contract depends on

defenders cards in principle?

 

:)

[Fluffy]

When you respodner is weak teh 12-14 is better declarer since its stronger.

 

When you play game the balanced hand is better to declare, ,adn that is often the opener of 1m. This is not always, but the advantages work, I play transfer responses to 1♣ and have seen it working, althou now a high percentage of them were due to the fact we played on the sidee with 3 cards when the fit was 3-5, I dunno if it is avaible on the major inversion.

[Free]

Who's to say which hand is right for declaring?

In some situations it's VERY clear, for example if you have to protect a Kx. In other situations it's not as clear obviously, but when responder is weak, it's imo better to let the stronger hand play (you get a better lead for example).

 

In relay auctions for example, it's usually better to let the unknown hand declare, so opps don't know what you have and this makes their defense VERY hard. That's why many transfers are used.

[Brandal]

Who's to say which hand is right for declaring?

In some situations it's VERY clear, for example if you have to protect a Kx. In other situations it's not as clear obviously, but when responder is weak, it's imo better to let the stronger hand play (you get a better lead for example).

 

In relay auctions for example, it's usually better to let the unknown hand declare, so opps don't know what you have and this makes their defense VERY hard. That's why many transfers are used.

I agree completely that stronger hands should be

declarer/hidden

 

My take was on both hands being say,12-14 range,

do you "feel" that you get an advantage getting

the final contract on the other hand from most of

the field when that is the case?

 

I'm curious,not saying anyone is wrong,I just

feel I get the contract on the best hand "usually"

so maybe in most cases it doesn't really have alot

to say which hand?

 

Apparently you think the same,you usually have the

contract on the best hand,being the other hand in some

or most cases.

 

:)