[Antig2]

I recently encountered the following hand. I would like to know if the first resonse is 1♥or 1♦
.
Open: ♠: * * * * ♥: * * * ♦: * * * ♣: * * * (4333 & 13pts)
Resp: ♠: * * ♥: * * * * ♦: * * * * * ♣:* * (2452 & 8pts)

Here are some possible auctions (assuming no interference from opponents).
1) -------------------------
1♣-1♥
1NT - 2♦
Pass

In this auction opener bypasses his 4♠ suit due to his 4333 shape. The responder shows 4♥ and 5♦ with 6-10pts.

2) ------------------------- first response 1♦
1♣-1♦
1♠ - 1NT
Pass

1♣-1♦
1NT - Pass (opener doesn't show his ♠ suit)

Rebidding 2♦ would show 6-suit

3) ------------------------- If opener shows his ♠ suit after 1♥ response
1♣-1♥
1♠ - 1NT
Pass

the responder is now required to bid 1NT since 2♦ is 13+pts GF.
-------------------------
Do you prefer 2♦ or 1NT contract for this hand. All auctions lead to 1NT except 1).

[helene_t]

All three are ok but personally I am not a big fan of 2). I think if opener sometimes has 4333 and sometime 4207 or 5206 it becomes too complicated for responder to sort out what opener has. So better try to keep the 1♠ rebid unbalanced when possible, which it certainly is after a 1♦ response.

After a 1♥ response it is not so good to let a 1♠ rebid promiss an unbalced hand since we could easily miss a spade fit. Even so, with 4333 I would prefer to rebid 1NT, even after a 1♥ response.

In general I prefer
1♣-1♥
1NT-pass
but might bid 2♦ instead of the final pass with some hands, depending on the quality of the diamond suit.

[Antig2]

1♣-1♥
1NT-2♦
pass

is a good auction and ♦ fit is likely unless opener has 3325 shape. For such hand both contracts 2♦ and 1NT look good. (I would prefer to be in 2♦ contract.)

[aguahombre]

Helene covered the subject.

This might be helpful for posting and for reading the posts of others:

4=3=3=3 denotes the exact order of the suits
4-3-3-3 is generic. Some just use 4x3.

Distributions described like 2-4-5-2 are assumed to be in rank order, but
5=4=2=2 probably should be specified for clarity if we are 5=4 in the majors, because 5-4-2-2 might be confused with a generic hand pattern without regard to with suit is which.

[fromageGB]

aguahombre, on 2012-June-13, 08:55, said:

This might be helpful for posting and for reading the posts of others:
4=3=3=3 denotes the exact order of the suits
4-3-3-3 is generic. Some just use 4x3.

I thought a standard was to use curly brackets around the suits where the length applies to any of those suits, and no curly brackets indicating the exact length, with suits in sequence spades, hearts, diamonds, clubs. No?

So {4333} is any flat hand with one 4 card suit, 2452 is 2 spades, 4 hearts, etc, and {54}22 is 5-4 in the majors but 5 in either major.

[aguahombre]

That works, and is used, as well.

[Mbodell]

I think non-curly parens also work (54)22 is obviously an order. I also think standard is 4333 is generic pattern.

On the bidding I like either 1♣-1red-1nt auctions (I do prefer 1♥ to 1♦ with a hand that will pass 1nt).

2=4=5=2 is a balanced hand and so is 4=3=3=3. Balanced hands belong in nt. 12-14 opposite 8 is not game. 1nt is where you should be.

My favorite natural auction on this hand is actually:

1nt-all pass because a 12-14 nt is actually more natural, IMO, than a 15-17 nt. But that might be a bit of bait for this thread, and I wouldn't want us to derail from the OP with something off topic like notation or the supremacy of the weak nt.

[fromageGB]

Keeping on topic, I can understand those people who would prefer - having seen the whole hand - to end in diamonds, but as opener may only have 1 or 2, and we have the values for 1NT, I much prefer 1NT. But how to get there? Not playing transfers, my preference would be to bid 1♦ as that way you are not going to miss any fit. So 1♣ 1♦ 1♠ 1NT.

I don't go with those who would have opener rebid 1NT rather than 1♠, as that might miss a spade fit, as I would also be bidding 1♦ on a 4252 shape. And I am not worried by opener possibly having a shapely hand such as the cited 4207 or 5206 as those hands will surely rebid 2♣ and 2♠ respectively (though my preference would be to open 1♠ on the latter). So I cannot agree with 1♠ showing an unbalanced rebid.

If you don't bid 1♦ then you will end in the wrong contract when opener is {31}45 with a singleton in your bid major.

[perko90]

There's definitely a matter of style here - whether you bid strictly up the line or a majors 1st approach (Walsh). Assuming the latter, the auction would likely go: 1♣-1♥; 1NT-P. I almost never rebid 1♠ w/ 4-3-3-3 shape. Also, for many pairs, a rebid of 2♦ would be new minor forcing (nmf), implying 5 hearts and an invitational or better hand. Even without an agreement of nmf, 2♦ would usually be forcing implying 5 hearts.
In general, I would rather end in 1NT anyway - it scores better. If you don't want to have those minor fits lost, it's probably better to play up-the-line. But even there, you'd likely get a 1♣-1♦; 1♠-1NT auction anyway. You'll at least have lots of company if 1NT turns out to be worse than 2♦'s.

[Antig2]

perko90, on 2012-June-14, 12:30, said:

There's definitely a matter of style here - whether you bid strictly up the line or a majors 1st approach (Walsh). Assuming the latter, the auction would likely go: 1♣-1♥; 1NT-P. I almost never rebid 1♠ w/ 4-3-3-3 shape. Also, for many pairs, a rebid of 2♦ would be new minor forcing (nmf), implying 5 hearts and an invitational or better hand. Even without an agreement of nmf, 2♦ would usually be forcing implying 5 hearts.
In general, I would rather end in 1NT anyway - it scores better. If you don't want to have those minor fits lost, it's probably better to play up-the-line. But even there, you'd likely get a 1♣-1♦; 1♠-1NT auction anyway. You'll at least have lots of company if 1NT turns out to be worse than 2♦'s.

according to sayc convention card the following auction shows 6-10pts with 4♥ and 5♦

1♣-1♥
1NT-2♦
PASS

[han]

I like 1C - 1D - 1S - 1NT.

[mike777]

1c=1h
1s=1nt looks fine.

you just need to prefer to play in a major or nt and lose the d suit fit sometimes.

[fromageGB]

mike777, on 2012-June-20, 16:48, said:

1c=1h
1s=1nt looks fine.

you just need to prefer to play in a major or nt and lose the d suit fit sometimes.

But how is this better than 1♣ 1♦ 1♠ 1NT?
I can see that the latter is better if there is a diamond fit, and there is a slight advantage that the oppo on lead does not know you have 4 hearts, so the lead might be advantageous. I can't see how bidding hearts rather than diamonds helps on this hand.
It may be a consequence of your methods, which possibly may be better elsewhere, but on this hand I think it is worse.

[mike777]

fromageGB, on 2012-June-21, 06:20, said:

But how is this better than 1♣ 1♦ 1♠ 1NT?
I can see that the latter is better if there is a diamond fit, and there is a slight advantage that the oppo on lead does not know you have 4 hearts, so the lead might be advantageous. I can't see how bidding hearts rather than diamonds helps on this hand.
It may be a consequence of your methods, which possibly may be better elsewhere, but on this hand I think it is worse.

ya prefer to have your auction promise an unbalanced hand such as 5c and 4s and responder denies 4h unless gf and unbalanced such as 5d and 4h, the trade off is I may lose a diamond partial.
nOte in your example if responder bids 2s over 1s, responder has shown 5d+4s and at least a mild slam try.
If responder starts with 1h and rebids 1nt he may induce a d lead into your 8 card fit.



you decide whether the trade off is worth the cost.

[fromageGB]

mike777, on 2012-June-21, 08:45, said:

ya prefer to have your auction promise an unbalanced hand such as 5c and 4s and responder denies 4h unless gf and unbalanced such as 5d and 4h, the trade off is I may lose a diamond partial.
nOte in your example if responder bids 2s over 1s, responder has shown 5d+4s and at least a mild slam try.
If responder starts with 1h and rebids 1nt he may induce a d lead into your 8 card fit.



you decide whether the trade off is worth the cost.

Thanks for the examples, I've never played, or come across opponents using, the walsh style. I can see the advantages on stronger hands. I play transfer walsh, and this has similar but different gains and trade-offs.