Five card majors - Strong NT - Prepared Club

[Dinarius]

You hold the following;

♠ K,10,7,3

♥ J,10,2

♦A,Q,6

♣ K,4,3

 

As Dealer, you open One♣. Partner responds One♥

 

Do you rebid One♠ or One NT?

 

Thanks.

 

D.

[wank]

it's a matter of agreement. if you play that 1S promises an unbalanced hand with clubs and spades, you bid 1NT. if you don't play that way, you bid 1S.

 

people from different bridge cultures consider one way or the other to be standard.

[fromageGB]

Looking at it dispassionately (I don't play either method) you need to have an agreement about this. If you bid 1♠ and partner assumes you have long clubs, he will bid 2♣ with a fairly weak 3433 shape, and now you are stuck. Conversely, if you bid 1NT and he is a weak 4432 shape you are again stuck in the wrong contract. If he is invitational or better, then it it really makes no difference.

 

Without agreement, what is best? One way of deciding is to consider the relative downsides of going wrong. At IMP scoring, playing 1NT when 2♠ is better is not going to matter much. Playing in 2♣ or getting too high in correcting it can be painful. So I'd rebid 1NT. At MP scoring, there is a good chance partner will correct 1♠ to 1NT rather than bid clubs, and this is much better because I certainly do not want to miss a possible spade fit. So at matchpoints I'd choose 1♠.

[helene_t]

A possible compromise is that 4333 rebid 1NT but 4(23)4 rebids 1♠, at least if the clubs are a respectable suit. That way, whenever you lose the 4-4 spade fit there is a reasonable chance that 1NT is a good contract, and responder can still take preference to 2♣ on a 3-card suit if he doesn't have a diamond stopper.

[barmar]

Unless I have a specific agreement about 1♠ promising an unbalanced hand, I tend to look at the quality of my holding in the unbid 3-card suit. In the given hand, with ♦AQx I'll bid 1NT. If they were xxx, I'd bid 1♠, so that partner can bid 1NT and the likely diamond lead will go to him.

[neilkaz]

Unless I have a specific agreement about 1♠ promising an unbalanced hand, I tend to look at the quality of my holding in the unbid 3-card suit. In the given hand, with ♦AQx I'll bid 1NT. If they were xxx, I'd bid 1♠, so that partner can bid 1NT and the likely diamond lead will go to him.

Same for me.

[mycroft]

"4333 hands suck."

 

As such, I don't really mind losing the potential 4=4 fit (although yesterday, partner dropped a 4=4=4=1 into 1♣-1♥; 1NT-P, +90 after hard work into potential easy +140).

 

I like, theoretically, "bypass 4 spades without 4 clubs" - in fact I play that with yesterday's partner.

 

I like, theoretically, "bypass 4cM to show a balanced hand" - I play that with my other regular partner, but since we play a weak NT in a strong NT environment, it's important to "get back to normal" as much as possible.

 

I'm not thrilled, theoretically, with "always bid spades, even if 4=3=3=3 with good 4th suit stoppers", but I can play it; it'll even be right sometimes, and definitely will be wrong when partner misdefends because I can't have 4 spades (but I do).

 

But like everyone else, I'm telling you that there is no correct answer, and it's what you and your partners agree on, knowing that sometimes, another agreement would have worked better.

[1eyedjack]

Also you want to factor in information leakage. Rebidding 1S tends to work if partner happens to have 4 card support (although not all the time). But if partner does not have 4 card support (more likely than not?) then concealing your own Spades provides a premium.

[nullve]

T-Walsh

[Dinarius]

Phew!

 

Thanks for the replies.

 

A few things emerge....

 

1. There is no right answer.

 

2. An agreement is necessary.

 

When I posed the original question, I should have been more generic about the 4,3,3,3 holding. I didn't want answers that took the specific qualities of the above holding into consideration, though I guess that was inevitable. And, yes, 4,3,3,3 holdings do suck.

 

Tactically, one consideration is that all the weak NTs and non-Vul Variable NTs will be playing in 1NT opposite partner's weak hand. I do like the suggestion above that, at Pairs scoring, you have the opportunity to find a 4/4 major fit (your 4 could also be in Hearts) and you should consider looking for it.

 

Thus, one agreement might be;

 

1. At Pairs, rebid the Major. Partner can pass, raise to the two level, or bid 1NT, as appropriate.

 

2. At Teams, rebid 1NT with 4,3,3,3. You are now playing with a large chunk of the room anyway.

 

3. At Teams, if you're rebid (after opening 1♣)is the Major, then you are unbalanced. i.e. the Club suit opening was genuine and Partner can Pass, support the Major, revert to Clubs, or bid NT.

 

The above is an attempt to make maximum tactical use of the fact that you have chosen to play Strong NT/5 Card Majors.

 

Make sense?

 

Thanks.

 

D.

[fromageGB]

Yes, I think that does make sense if you want to play natural responses, but as nullve whispered, twalsh solves all problems and is the way to go if you have a partner who is not a hidebound stick-in-the-mud, and is prepared to put in some discussion time. It's both the most useful and the most fun bridge treatment ever.

[Dinarius]

Yes, I think that does make sense if you want to play natural responses, but as nullve whispered, twalsh solves all problems and is the way to go if you have a partner who is not a hidebound stick-in-the-mud, and is prepared to put in some discussion time. It's both the most useful and the most fun bridge treatment ever.

 

Fromage,

 

What's T-Walsh?

 

Thanks.

 

D.

[helene_t]

Playing T-Walsh, responder will bid 1♦ which shows 4+ hearts. How it now proceeds is a question of style, but the most popular style in the UK is for opener to accept the transfer with all balanced hands with 12-14 points (and less than 4-card heart support).

 

In the simplest version, the transfer accept promises a balanced 12-14 hand. So now responder can still look for a spade fit by bidding 1♠, or he can opt for 2♦ (with 5+ diamonds), for 2♥ (with 5+ hearts), or 1nt otherwise.

[fourdad]

Without agreement, if pd can still have 4 spades for the 1♥ bid, I prefer 1♠.

[Caitlynne]

You should not rebid 1S only because that guarantees 4 clubs! You should not be bidding two suits unless you actually have two suits!!!! So you should rebid 1NT, as you always should with fewer than 4 card support for partner's major and a 4333 pattern.

 

Yes, unfortunately, that means bypassing your 4 card spade suit might result in your partnership failing to find an existing 4-4 spade fit (which could happen when partner has bid 1H with 4+ hearts, 4 spades, and less than game invitational values).

 

But this is a small price to pay for at least two reasons:

 

1. You don't have a game and will play in a reasonable partscore contract (of 1NT); and

 

2. Your 4333 pattern means your hand's ruffing values are meager, so your hand may very well play as well or better in NT than in a 4-4 spade fit.

[fromageGB]

What's T-Walsh?

Transfer Walsh is essentially red suit transfers to a 1♣ open. As you can get a reply to this at the 1-level, you can do it with a 4 card major, as compared to the transfer over a 1NT open which gets a 2-level reply and therefore needs 5 cards. Those two responses are all that you can rely on if someone says they play twalsh : everything else is up to discussion. I think most common is that opener rebids 2M or higher (depending on strength) with 4 cards in responder's major, M; rebids 1M with 12-14 and 2 or 3 card support (if playing a strong NT); and with 2 or 3 card support and a balanced hand too strong to open 1NT opener rebids 1NT. This is a powerful feature, keeping the level low, which greatly increases both safety and the room for exploration. Opener can of course bid other things such as 2♣ to show a long suit non-balanced open (for me this is 6 card, and denies 3 card support).

 

If responder bids "1 red" to show the higher suit, what does 1♠ mean? You can use this to mean "diamonds", the reply annihilated by the transfers, but it is better to use it as a relay for opener to describe his hand, typically 1NT with a balanced 12-14. Responder can now for example pass, raise, bid 2 of a minor to play, 3 of a minor game force, and even 2M (having already denied a major) as game invitation with 5+ of the corresponding minor. (This allows a declined invitation to play in 2NT or 3m, depending on fit.) Many things you can do.

 

So if 1♠ can be bid with weak balanced hands, what does a 1NT reply mean? And if 1♠ can be bid with minors, what does a 2♣ or 2♦ response mean? All this is fertile ground to put to your advantage to handle things the way you see as most beneficial, but I stress all this is non-standard, and depends on partnership discussion. You can keep it simple, or you can get a lot of benefit.

 

There is also plenty of new room available for responder rebids when the 1M gets back to him. Some people use standard conventions that are designed for normal bidding, such as XYZ, but you can do better with all that space. Again, all depending on partnership discussion and agreement.

[fromageGB]

You should not rebid 1S only because that guarantees 4 clubs!

Caitlynne, I think this is non-standard, but of course your agreements can be anything, which is one of the beauties of twalsh. For me, 1♠ guarantees either a 6 card club suit or a 4315 shape. I prefer to complete the heart transfer with your 4333 12-14, and now responder can bid 1♠ with four (or my preference - a spade/NT inversion). In this field - each to his own!

[neilkaz]

You should not rebid 1S only because that guarantees 4 clubs! You should not be bidding two suits unless you actually have two suits!!!! So you should rebid 1NT, as you always should with fewer than 4 card support for partner's major and a 4333 pattern.

 

Yes, unfortunately, that means bypassing your 4 card spade suit might result in your partnership failing to find an existing 4-4 spade fit (which could happen when partner has bid 1H with 4+ hearts, 4 spades, and less than game invitational values).

 

But this is a small price to pay for at least two reasons:

 

1. You don't have a game and will play in a reasonable partscore contract (of 1NT); and

 

2. Your 4333 pattern means your hand's ruffing values are meager, so your hand may very well play as well or better in NT than in a 4-4 spade fit.

 

3. Once in a while the opps balance into ♠ and suffer to a bad split.

 

4. They sometimes lead a harmless ♠ vs your NT contract.

[miamijd]

As others have mentioned, you need to have an agreement on these sorts of hands.

 

Pros for bidding 1NT:

1. If you reserve 1S for hands where you actually have 4+ clubs, partner will be better able to determine whether you belong in clubs or NT.

 

2. 1NT slows down the auction, which is advantageous if you have 12 or a bad 13. If you bid 1NT, partner won't raise to 2NT without an 11-count (your max is 14). If you bid 1S, however, your upper limit is 18 or so, and partner will be forced to bid 2NT with a decent 10-count (6-10 is too wide a range for a 1NT call). Now if you have 12 or a bad 13, you are in danger of going set.

 

3. You give less information to the opponents.

 

Pros for bidding 1S:

1. If partner is 44 in the majors with a hand not worth an invite to game, you will play 1NT instead of 2S.

 

Personally, I think the advantages of bidding 1NT on these sorts of hands (and indeed, with a lot of 4234 and 4324 hands) outweigh the disadvantages at any form of scoring, but many disagree.

 

Cheers,

mike

[rmnka447]

I tend to bid 1 ♠ with any distribution even 4-3-3-3. Only occasionally will I bid 1 NT with a 4-3-3-3 hand. Usually, this is with lots of intermediates, stoppers, and not particularly great ♠. I'd be very tempted to do it with this hand.

 

If you're willing to take the heat for missing a 4-4 ♠ by bidding 1 NT, then 1 NT is probably right. If not, then bid 1 ♠.

[miamijd]

I tend to bid 1 ♠ with any distribution even 4-3-3-3. Only occasionally will I bid 1 NT with a 4-3-3-3 hand. Usually, this is with lots of intermediates, stoppers, and not particularly great ♠. I'd be very tempted to do it with this hand.

 

If you're willing to take the heat for missing a 4-4 ♠ by bidding 1 NT, then 1 NT is probably right. If not, then bid 1 ♠.

 

You'll only miss a 44 spade fit when responder has less than an invite. With an invite or better, responder can use any of several conventions (NMF, two-way NMF, xyz, etc) to check on a 44 spade fit.

 

Cheers,

Mike

[Zelandakh]

You should not rebid 1S only because that guarantees 4 clubs!

No, as others have pointed out that depends on agreements. In countries like France and Germany, the most popular method is that a 1NT rebid absolutely denies a 4 card spade suit. Within these systems you obviously rebid 1♠. If having the agreement that a 1♠ rebid shows an unbalanced hand, a popular method in the US, you obviously rebid 1NT. And then there is the method where rebidding 1♠ shows real clubs but not necessarily an unbalanced hand, in which 4333 is also a 1NT rebid. It is completely wrong to call any of these methods standard in an international sense and clearly a serious overbid to describe the minimum length of clubs for a 1♠ rebid as "guaranteed".

[Kaitlyn S]

If having the agreement that a 1♠ rebid shows an unbalanced hand, a popular method in the US, you obviously rebid 1NT.

I believe most bridge teachers in the US teach to not bypass a four card spade suit to bid 1NT (i.e. would bid 1S on 4-3-3-3.)

[661_Pete]

"Acol" may be a dirty word amongst some players, but see how much easier it is for this hand! You open an obvious 1NT (12-14), partner if they have a good heart suit, bids 2♦, you have to bid 2♥ and then it's back to partner. They know your strength: if they don't see a game they will leave it at that.

 

OK I know I'm out of line with the thread title, but I just thought I'd post this anyway....

[1eyedjack]

"Acol" may be a dirty word amongst some players, but see how much easier it is for this hand! You open an obvious 1NT (12-14), partner if they have a good heart suit, bids 2♦, you have to bid 2♥ and then it's back to partner. They know your strength: if they don't see a game they will leave it at that.

 

OK I know I'm out of line with the thread title, but I just thought I'd post this anyway....

This analysis is incomplete, and at least overly simplistic.

 

The argument about rebidding 1S v 1N largely (but not entirely) centres on the existence or not of a 4-4 Spade fit and the cost of missing it when responder lacks a game try. That argument to some extent exists whenever you are outside the range to open 1N. If you happen to be playing a weak 1N then the same questions arise (ie in Acol) when you are dealt a hand outside that range. It is pure accident that at the outset of this thread the hand happened to fall within the range for an Acol 1N opener.

 

Likewise it is false to conclude that your problems even on this hand are solved by playing Acol. Sure you open 1N, and sure the responses are "easier": responder passes whatever on the problem hand and you guarantee missing the 4-4 Spade fit. It does not necessarily improve your chances of finding the right contract if the system prescribes that you miss the fit, supposedly taking away your "problem".