Expert or lucky?

[Wackojack]

http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=pn||st%7C%7Cmd%7C1S46TH9QD38JC4679A%2CS57QKH58TD67KAC35%2CS389JH234KD2C2TJQ%2C%7Crh%7C%7Cah%7CBoard%2011%7Csv%7Co%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C1D%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C1H%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C1S%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C2C%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C2H%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C3D%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C3H%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C3N%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CDT%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CST%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cpc%7CSQ%7Cpc%7CS9%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CS7%7Cpc%7CSJ%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CH9%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CH4%7C

 

Expert or lucky to rightside? Would you criticise 1D-1H-1NT-3NT?

[nige1]

Holding ♠ K Q x x ♥ T x x ♦ A K x x ♣ x x, IMO, West showed good judgement to rebid 1♠. rather than 1N. Although a 2♥ raise is another option that might work.

[robert2734]

1D-1H-1S-3N

[rhm]

Would you criticise 1D-1H-1NT-3NT?

I would.

 

Where are all those "experts", who claim that any rebid except notrumps by opener should guarantee an unbalanced hand?

 

If opener rebids 1♠ there is plenty of room to find out whether opener is balanced or not.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[nullve]

Where are all those "experts", who claim that any rebid except notrumps by opener should guarantee an unbalanced hand?

 

If opener rebids 1♠ there is plenty of room to find out whether opener is balanced or not.

The problem in std is to

 

* find 2H with 5 H opposite 4S3H (or even 4S2H)

* avoid 2H with 5 H opposite 4S1H (or even 4S0H)

[ggwhiz]

Where are all those "experts", who claim that any rebid except notrumps by opener should guarantee an unbalanced hand?

Rainer Herrmann

 

I'm one but would rebid 1♠ here as it's definitely not an always situation and quick tricks generally belong in a suit contract.

 

However, responder should go through 2♣ (fsf to game) and it gets awkward after that so put me down for lucky.

 

1♦ - 1♥

1♠ - 2♣

2♥ - ? I admit I would bid 3♦ before 2nt and be as likely to stumble into an also lucky 4♥ as 3nt

[Fluffy]

I don't understand this discussion it is a systemic problem, nothing about judgement. 100% in my country rebid 1♠.

[helene_t]

If opener rebids 1♠ there is plenty of room to find out whether opener is balanced or not.

Yes but the actual auction did not reveal West's balanced shape. If W wants, at some point during the FSF auction, to show a balanced hand without actually bidding notrumps, you need some artificiality. I am sure that is possible. But if the discussion is limited to natural methods for some reason ....

 

Also, it is difficult for responder to make a limit bid opposite an opener that could have a balanced or unbalanced minimum.

 

FWIW I prefer a 1♠ rebid with the West hand.

[Vampyr]

I don't understand this discussion it is a systemic problem, nothing about judgement. 100% in my country rebid 1♠.

 

Here it is much more common to have a way to check back. I wouldn't rebid 1♠ unless I had a specific agreement with partner, otherwise he will not believe I have a weak NT. Of course with virtually all of my partners I will already have opened a weak NT, and am interested if there are people who, playing a weak NT, would not do so.

[rhm]

Yes but the actual auction did not reveal West's balanced shape. If W wants, at some point during the FSF auction, to show a balanced hand without actually bidding notrumps, you need some artificiality.

Not sure.

Why can't opener not jump to 3♥ over 2♣ if he is short in clubs?

Accordingly his chosen sequence 2♥ followed by 3♥ shows a balanced hand.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[beowulf]

I'm one but would rebid 1♠ here as it's definitely not an always situation and quick tricks generally belong in a suit contract.

 

However, responder should go through 2♣ (fsf to game) and it gets awkward after that so put me down for lucky.

 

1♦ - 1♥

1♠ - 2♣

2♥ - ? I admit I would bid 3♦ before 2nt and be as likely to stumble into an also lucky 4♥ as 3nt

 

I wanted to simply up vote your answer, but I've reached my maximum number of up votes for the day (0)!

 

But this is definitely an area for judgment once we've established that we couldn't open a weak no-trump for systemic reasons. Do we want to emphasize the fact that our values are all in the pointy suits? Or do we want to emphasize the fact that we don't have any shortness? Either could be right on any given day. But, for those of us who like to bid minor suit slams (this hand is very close actually) it's rather important to know that we have at least four of our minor (1♠ says we do, 1NT says we might). Admittedly, with the minor being diamonds, we know that opener has at least four as soon as he doesn't raise hearts.

[helene_t]

Not sure.

Why can't opener not jump to 3♥ over 2♣ if he is short in clubs?

Accordingly his chosen sequence 2♥ followed by 3♥ shows a balanced hand.

Wouldn't a jump show a stronger hand? The upper limit of West's range is at least 17 HCPs. 3♥ eats a lot of space considering that we don't even know if we have a fit anywhere. I think it should be accurate in terms of strength.

[Caitlynne]

Yes, I would criticize a 1NT rebid instead of 1S. This is not expert or lucky to bid 1S. It is just normal. In fact, bidding 1NT would DENY 4 card length in spades. A 1NT rebid is the bid of a beginner or a mastermind.

 

The expert bid on this auction was 3H, which not only confirmed 3 card heart support - 2 card in hearts was possible on a holding like KQxx, Jx, AKxx, xxx - but also allowed the right-siding of the NT game to occur.

[eagles123]

well I'm really glad I wasn't West.. oh :P

 

I just assumed if I bid 1S i was showing unbal here, learn something new every day :)

[kuhchung]

well I'm really glad I wasn't West.. oh :P

 

I just assumed if I bid 1S i was showing unbal here, learn something new every day :)

 

I think it's exactly what Fluffy said: it's a matter of agreement. I also play 1S rebid as unbalanced, but I also raise with 3 if I have a worthless doubleton.

 

If you gave me Tx of clubs or something, well now I'm eating crow. Oh well.

[robert2734]

After 1D-1H-1S does east ever want to play anywhere other than 3N on a hand west will pass 3N? Fourth suit forcing 2C will let you let you learn more about partners hand but the opponents will as well. You already know you don't have a 4-4 heart fit or a 3-5 heart fit. You don't want the lead through your Kx of clubs.

[gszes]

Would the bidding be any different if east held the same hand less the club king? Why is 3d forcing here instead of invitational? That part seems like luck that west kept the bidding open with pretty much a minimum opener. If 3d was indeed GF (instead of using 3c) why did west bid 3h? I use that bid to show a partial club stop for 3n but that is not the case here so what was its purpose? So luck appears to be a major factor again.

 

I am an inverted minor bidder so my auction would proceed '

1d

2d inverted does not deny a 4 card major

2s does not promise 4 spades but if no 4 spades a problem with club for NT

3n at least we have given p a decent idea of what our hand looks like and maybe right siding 3n

p who am I to argue?

[Stephen Tu]

After 1D-1H-1S does east ever want to play anywhere other than 3N on a hand west will pass 3N? Fourth suit forcing 2C will let you let you learn more about partners hand but the opponents will as well. You already know you don't have a 4-4 heart fit or a 3-5 heart fit. You don't want the lead through your Kx of clubs.

 

1♠ is still fairly wide ranging. There are quite a few good unbalanced hands with partner, stiff heart, that don't really have any business moving over, that make very good slams. Concealing 5 cd diamond support is giving up on quite a few slams.

 

It reveals more to the opponents, but if partner won't bid NT over 4th suit without a C stop you still get to protect your CK from the lead.

[Stephen Tu]

Would the bidding be any different if east held the same hand less the club king? Why is 3d forcing here instead of invitational?

 

Yes. These days the most common agreement is 2♣ 4th suit is forcing to game. If East did not hold the CK, he would bid 3♦, invitational, rather than 2♣ over the 1♠. It is also reasonable IMO to play it the other way around, that direct 3♦ over 1♠ is GF, while going through 2♣ is invitational (something Richard Pavlicek advocates), but for whatever reasons unclear to me has become a distinctly minority view.

 

That part seems like luck that west kept the bidding open with pretty much a minimum opener. If 3d was indeed GF (instead of using 3c) why did west bid 3h?

Because West has to bid something if it's GF, doesn't want to bypass 3nt if partner has the club stopper, so why not 3H? Generally when partner has forced you to bid, you usually need some call to not say anything, just that you don't have anything else more descriptive to offer.

[Zelandakh]

I will already have opened a weak NT, and am interested if there are people who, playing a weak NT, would not do so.

It is a clear 1NT opener for me too and I suspect far more would be in the wrong-sided 3NT in practise than end up there on the forums while seeing both hands.

[P_Marlowe]

Here it is much more common to have a way to check back. I wouldn't rebid 1♠ unless I had a specific agreement with partner, otherwise he will not believe I have a weak NT. Of course with virtually all of my partners I will already have opened a weak NT, and am interested if there are people who, playing a weak NT, would not do so.

We play weak NT, but the 1NT opening denies 4 spades unless 4333.

But absent this explicit agreement, I would open 1NT.

They stayman seq. will give the thint, that clubs is a good bet.

 

Regarding the original post: This is an systemic question.

You take the positive effects, if openers rebid showes / denies a bal.

hands, and you take the negative side effects.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[rmnka447]

Playing weak NTs, we'd open the West hand 1 NT and thereafter be fixed by the system.

 

Playing strong NTs in Standard or 2/1, the bids would likely be the same through at least 3 ♦ assuming 2 ♣ is a 4th suit forcing GF. Minor openers are much more likely in a strong NT context to be minimum hands, so it's easier to lose ♠ if you don't bid them. So, it's fairly rare to bid 1 NT when holding 4 ♠.

 

IMO, the 3 ♥ temporizing bid was terrific. It sort of implied indecision about where to play and sought partner's opinion. East made the logical choice, but was a bit lucky to find 9 running tricks to go with the protected ♣ stop. Change the ♦ K into the ♥ K and 3 NT is more problematical.

[gszes]

Yes. These days the most common agreement is 2♣ 4th suit is forcing to game. If East did not hold the CK, he would bid 3♦, invitational, rather than 2♣ over the 1♠. It is also reasonable IMO to play it the other way around, that direct 3♦ over 1♠ is GF, while going through 2♣ is invitational (something Richard Pavlicek advocates), but for whatever reasons unclear to me has become a distinctly minority view.

 

 

Because West has to bid something if it's GF, doesn't want to bypass 3nt if partner has the club stopper, so why not 3H? Generally when partner has forced you to bid, you usually need some call to not say anything, just that you don't have anything else more descriptive to offer.

 

3s would be a clear cut case of waiting since there is no natural distribution by opener where 3s could mean 5+ spades. That's why 3h has a use as a partial club stop for 3n.

[Jinksy]

I just assumed if I bid 1S i was showing unbal here, learn something new every day :)

 

All I see is a thread full of people boasting that their methods work on this hand. If you play a 1♠ rebid as an unbalanced hand, don't bid it here. If you don't and don't bid it here, what hand could you be waiting for? I've not seen anyone present evidence that either way is clearly better than the other.

[Jinksy]

Where are all those "experts", who claim that any rebid except notrumps by opener should guarantee an unbalanced hand?

 

In your head, perhaps?