Diamonds are Forever

[beatrix45]

[hv=d=n&v=e&s=s2hkj85dk98763ca9]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

You are playing 2/1 with a pick up partner on BBO. She is the dealer; you are third seat. Matchpoints, and opponents are vul. The bidding goes:

 

1 ♣ - P - 1 ♦ - P

1 NT - P - ???

 

What do you bid now, and what is your plan?

 

What, if anything, do you think of an initial response of 1 ♥ on my hand? If you do respond 1 ♥, partner will rebid 1 NT. Assuming you favor a 1 ♥ initial response, what would you bid on your second turn?

[mike777]

Not Walsh style. With XYZ

 

Is your main question, is Walsh style dominate style among top class 2/1 pickup partners?

 

My guess is yes, but great question to ask.

 

1C=1H

1NT=2C (NOW P BIDS 2H WITH 3H OTHERWISE 2D, IN ANY CASE YOU REBID 3D INVITE).

 

Since this is MP and premium on going plus then....

 

If playing junky openers where 1nt rebid =11-13, you got choices:

1) invite in D as above or

2) sign off in 2H if P has 3 or if not play in 2D by passing Partner's rebid over 2c.

[whereagles]

Why complicate? Just bid what you have: 2H.

[Fluffy]

I would assume walsh, but still might start with 1♦, you have to pick your range on first round: GF-> 1♦, limit->1♥.

 

I dunno how do you show a 4-6 limit hand with XYZ, I guess with 2♣ followed by 3♦, or am I wrong? (roudi did that with 2NT-3♣-3♦ :)).

[luke warm]

even playing walsh i'd bid 1d first time... but now, 2c assuming xyz or 2 way, planning on 2h

[han]

I like Jimmy's auction best, shows exactly 4 hearts, longer diamonds, invitational values, and it allows you to stop in 2H.

 

btw, I think that it should be encouraged to discuss conventions DURING the hands when playing with pick-up partners. Guessing what conventions you play should not be part of bridge.

[inquiry]

The title of this thread is how to invite game. To invite here with a pickup partner, jump to 3♦, which can be passed.

 

With a pickup parnter with whom you have not discussed such things as XYZ, with this hand, just bid simply and directly, 3NT. To begin with, 3NT rates to be the contract the field is playing, why give the opponents any more info before you get there. Sure, they have nine spades (at least) unless your partner will bypass 1NT when holding 4♠. But what the heck, matchpoints is not "real bridge", 3Nt is often bid rather than gentle exploration if 4 or 5♦ is the top spot. And with a pick-up partner in an individual, just do the obvious thing on these hands.

 

If playing xyz, i would bid 2♦ (game force), and then bid hearts, to see if we might avoid a hopeless 3NT if partner has Jxx of spades or the like, and land in a makable 5♦/6♦ instead, even at matchpoints, if his hand is something like Jxx Ax AQx Kxxxx.

 

Ben

[Fluffy]

I like Jimmy's auction best, shows exactly 4 hearts, longer diamonds, invitational values, and it allows you to stop in 2H.

 

btw, I think that it should be encouraged to discuss conventions DURING the hands when playing with pick-up partners. Guessing what conventions you play should not be part of bridge.

I am fully with you

[mike777]

..

[P_Marlowe]

2H.

 

Forcing for one round, promising at least

5 diamonds and at least a good 3 card

suit, having 4 does not hurt, and partner should

treat 2H as natural, i.e. a 4 card suit.

The adv. opposite a jump to 3D is, that you

describe the value distribution of your hand,

and partner should assume a 5-4, shape

 

And no, I dont bid 1H, but then I would not

do it with 4-4 as well, and this is clearly a

minority view.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Guest Jlall]

I don't see how one could treat this as an invitational hand opposite a weak NT? looks like a GF to me. Anyways, i'd bid 2H.

[Winstonm]

Playing Walsh style, you are forced into some kind of checkback for invitational hands.

 

My preferred method is to play 2C as the ONLY force other than the natural reverse.

 

WinstonM

[PriorKnowledge]

Non-Walsh is easier. 1C 1D 1N 3D = invitational, which is exactly what you want.

 

Walsh, you have to decide if this is a game-force or not. I think so. So respond 1D and rebid 2H, which is a GF in Walsh.

[Guest Jlall]

why is this hand a GF in walsh but an invite in non-walsh?

[Gerben42]

This has nothing to do with 2/1 as no one has bid 2/1. What's wrong with an invitational 3♦? This is not a Checkback situation.

[mike777]

This has nothing to do with 2/1 as no one has bid 2/1. What's wrong with an invitational 3♦? This is not a Checkback situation.

Playing XYZ 3d=slam try is one reason after p has shown a minimum balanced hand. That would be one reason we need to start with 2 clubs checkback. A second reason is opener has not denied 4hearts yet. This has everything to do with 2/1 not nothing. This makes me think people do not know Walsh is the father of 2/1.

 

1c=1d or 1c=1h are 2/1 system bids as much as 1d=2c is a 2/1 system bid.

[Al_U_Card]

Hmmmmn, guess it depends on your system, but since the Moysian 4-3 in H will tap your hand, you'll need 3-3 H and pard to have A or AQ of H and AJT of S. If 2H (rev by responder) is NOT GF then that followed by 3D to get to the right game.

[Winstonm]

Does anyone know what is considered the "definitve" 2005 version of Walsh-style?

 

Years ago when I was introduced to the concept, it struck me as almost a "reverse canape'" - that is a weak hand bids his longer suit at his second opportunity.

 

This made quite a lot of sense as every bid took on a natural meaning and "lugging" around fourth suit forcing to plug every hole was not a requirement.

 

Question: How is this hand bid today? xx, Kxxx, AJxxxx, x in this auction:

 

1C-1H-1S-?

 

Seeems to me there are these options: 1) Bid 2 diamonds, natural and weak. 2) bid a forced 1N. I always thought that the biggest advantage of Walsh was its "Natural meaning" tendency, that you can go ahead and bid what you have - the only "hole" I found was plugged nicely by utilizing 2C as an "all purpose checkback", either as a game try or a game force based on subsequent bidding.

 

So to my thinking, the above hand is best bid 1C-1H-1S-2D.

 

Have the last 20 years proven this wrong while I wasn't looking?

 

Thanks,

 

WinstonM

[civill]

The south seems has a shape of 33 majors,IMO,invite 2NT is better.Could XYZ get there?

[Guest Jlall]

Does anyone know what is considered the "definitve" 2005 version of Walsh-style?

 

Years ago when I was introduced to the concept, it struck me as almost a "reverse canape'" - that is a weak hand bids his longer suit at his second opportunity.

 

This made quite a lot of sense as every bid took on a natural meaning and "lugging" around fourth suit forcing to plug every hole was not a requirement.

 

Question: How is this hand bid today? xx, Kxxx, AJxxxx, x in this auction:

 

1C-1H-1S-?

 

Seeems to me there are these options: 1) Bid 2 diamonds, natural and weak. 2) bid a forced 1N. I always thought that the biggest advantage of Walsh was its "Natural meaning" tendency, that you can go ahead and bid what you have - the only "hole" I found was plugged nicely by utilizing 2C as an "all purpose checkback", either as a game try or a game force based on subsequent bidding.

 

So to my thinking, the above hand is best bid 1C-1H-1S-2D.

 

Have the last 20 years proven this wrong while I wasn't looking?

 

Thanks,

 

WinstonM

I think its more useful to be able to raise partners clubs at the 2 level in a non forcing way than be able to bid the 4th suit in a non forcing way from a frequency point of view.

[mike777]

Question: How is this hand bid today? xx, Kxxx, AJxxxx, x in this auction:

 

1C-1H-1S-?

 

XYZ

 

 

With lite openings I bid 2c which forces p to bid 2h with 3h's or rebid 2d if P can stand a pass of 2D or rebid 2s with a good 2 suited 5-5 etc hand. With sound openings I could raise 2d to 3d with junky openings I pass 2D.

[Winstonm]

I think its more useful to be able to raise partners clubs at the 2 level in a non forcing way than be able to bid the 4th suit in a non forcing way from a frequency point of view.

 

I have to admit that when I started playing again after another of my multi-year layoffs, I read Marty Bergen's ideas on Walsh and found them sound. So my style of Walsh is based on his ideas.

 

The question gets down to how complex of system you want to play it seems. By utilizing 2C as the only forcing bid in all 1-1-1 auctions, every other bid retains its natural meaning as far as suit and its strength as far as Walsh; it also eliminates totally the need for an artificial fourth suit bid, as both invitational strength and game forcing hands all begin with 1 bid by responder: 2C.

 

The give up is that with a weak 45 you have to use 3C instead of 2C to show a minimum club hand; however, the simplicity of the concept, I feel, outweighs the ability to compete precisely at 2C.

 

WinstonM