[OldGranton]

.
Here's the page that prompted my question:

http://www.bidandmad...r_principle.php

Here's the key quote:

• When the opener misses out a rebid that he could have made, it's because he doesn't have this suit.
  
  For example, after 1D-1H, an opener's re-bid of 2C means he does not have a 4-card spade suit.

BTW 1: There's an old forum post here (2003):

http://www.bridgebas...-suits-in-acol/

However, I don't think any of the posters mention the "deniability" aspect. In other words, if I "skip over" a 4-card suit, does it DENY 4 cards in that suit?"

BTW 2: I don't think there's any need to discuss "suit-oriented" bids, such as Weak Twos, Strong Twos, preempts, etc. The sites that I've seen all recommend some kind of "minimum suit quality" for such bids.


THanks.
.

[Vampyr]

The concept of biddable suits is basically obsolete. You bid according to your shape. With a very weak suit you may choose to deny it if 1NT seems a more descriptive response, but if you have a fit you will lose it.

Also, a player rebidding 1NT (or 2NT) may skip over one or both major suits in order to show a balanced hand in the appropriate range. This is why most partnerships have a way of checking back for a major-suit fit.

[FelicityR]

Old style Acol is a very neat system where you try (initially) to obtain a 4-4 fit by bidding suits in ascending order, in principle. So technically (once upon a time) a poor 4 card suit should/would have be bid.

Times change, and as Vampyr rightly says 'the concept of biddable suits is basically obsolete'.

Depending on the actual hand, I still personally persevere with bidding weak 4 card suits when the situation arises, and is appropriate. There are some advantages: a) you may find a fit, and, b) you may deter a lead from the opponents; the disadvantage is that partner may lead that suit against a contract hoping you have something when, in fact, you have nothing in the way of honour cards.

[m1cha]

FelicityR, on 2017-April-27, 04:16, said:

Old style Acol is a very neat system where you try (initially) to obtain a 4-4 fit by bidding suits in ascending order, in principle. So technically (once upon a time) a poor 4 card suit should/would have be bid.

When I learnt old-style Acol (which was perhaps another 5 years older than yours) 4-card majors without honors would not be bid. These days, as far as I see, not bidding a suit just because it lacks an honor, would count as a misbid. However, lacking an honor in a long suit can be a reason to downgrade your hand by about a point.

And while singular events prove nothing, they can occasionally make you happy. Last year I had to play 4♠ with the top five trump cards missing - and made it.

[Kaitlyn S]

5432 might be a typical holding for a Marty Bergen weak two bid. Which reminds me of a funny story.

Marty opened 2S and later his partner had an opportunity to double a 3S cuebid with ♠Ax but didn't. It was pointed out that Marty gets off to the killing lead if 3S had been doubled. Marty's partner replied that he wasn't sure he could set 3S.

[GrahamJson]

I recall Terence Reece commenting, when his partner raised to 2C rather than responding 1S on a suit like this, "I see no sense in bidding bad suits on bad hands when there is a sound alternative". Maybe this is old school and things have moved on, but I think he still has a point. A suit such as 5432 can be bid if there is no good alternative, but only as a last resort. As a consequence I dislike the assumption that goes along the line "partner can't have four spades (or whatever) because he didn't bid 1S".

[ahydra]

It depends on the circumstances. I'd certainly treat 5432 as a suit in a major or as a raise of partner's suit, and the majority of other times as well unless NT seemed a better choice eg. rebidding 1NT 15-17 rather than 2C on Kx AQxxx AQ 5432 after 1H-1S.

Shape is the most important word in Bridge! Suit quality is very much a secondary concern.

ahydra

[msjennifer]

A very nice poser! There are going to be long arguments (perhaps not quite cool)in favour or against bidding 5432 suit.Hope I get to draw some firm conclusions !

[Finanzier]

The strength of a suit is nearly never the deciding factor. In a reasonable contract the nasty distribution of the opps might bring us down, the 4-1 breaks and the unfavourable position of the high cards.

Mostly the side high cards were more significant than the trump high cards.
I remember a nice 7-1 fit with 10xxxxxx made 4 ♥, while the opps complained about the injustice. But I dont agree.

In my youth barraging with KQ10xxx and a side king my partner had AJxx with a flat hand without side tricks and he was so proud like me desperate :
"What do you think, what would happen, if the opps had this cards?" "They would run in a slam", I anwered.
A and Jack in the right side suit together with 2 smalll trumps would have suited me much better.

Bidding 1 ♠ with this hand lets the bidding fluent. P can assume otherwise, that your 1NT bid denies 4 ♠.
The trust in the bidding is from great value. The prize that P attacks sometimes with the King from ♠Kx I pay.

Dont forget that you have to make a non-perfect bid because the hand is non-perfect.
You have to pay sometimes whatever you do.

[OldGranton]

.

Vampyr, on 2017-April-27, 03:40, said:

With a very weak suit you may choose to deny it if 1NT seems a more descriptive response

At my level, I try to carefully avoid expressing opinions. But I think I'm allowed to quote other people's opinions :-)

Here are selected recommended responses to an opening bid of one of a suit. I try to use their EXACT wording, where possible. Otherwise, I would simply be giving my own interpretation of their exact wording. My interpretation is 84.37% likely to be wrong :-)

NoFearBridge:

Bid 4+ card suit at the one level (plus all other possible responses to one of a suit)
If none of the above, bid 1NT (need not be balanced hand)

BidAndMade:

Bid 1 of a 4+ card suit (plus all other possible responses to one of a suit)
Bid NT if none of the above.
(Note that BidAndMade describe a 1NT response as a "dustbin" response.)

EBU:

A 1NT response may be something of a "dustbin" bid when there is no other appropriate response, e.g. weak unbalanced hands not suitable for a response at the two level.
Always prefer to respond in a major suit at the one level if you can.
.

[Liversidge]

OldGranton, on 2017-April-30, 03:56, said:

.

NoFearBridge:

Bid 4+ card suit at the one level (plus all other possible responses to one of a suit)
If none of the above, bid 1NT (need not be balanced hand)

The NoFear site has a 'tip' called 'Never deny a 4 card major'. The example hand given is a 5432 spade suit which you are advised to bid rather than the good 5 card club suit, because you have fewer than 12 HCP. With more then you would be strong enough to show your spades on the second round.

[OldGranton]

.

Liversidge, on 2017-April-30, 04:40, said:

The NoFear site has a 'tip' called 'Never deny a 4 card major'. The example hand given is a 5432 spade suit which you are advised to bid rather than the good 5 card club suit, because you have fewer than 12 HCP. With more then you would be strong enough to show your spades on the second round.

That must be the only 5432 hand on the internet - apart from the hand in this thread :-)

For the benefit of readers who will never see it again, here's the full hand:

South

S 5 4 3 2
H 6
D A 8 5
C K Q J 7 2
.

[Phil]

It depends on context and the nature of my hand, but in general I will show a suit like 5432. I think the objective is to not avoid a nine card fit, although missing an eight card fit can be OK.

Here's a few exceptions:

1. Partner opens 1♣ and I hold AQx 5432 KJx QTx. My hand is very NT'y and its quite likely we will take the same number of tricks in NT as a suit.

2. I open 1N with AQx 5432 KJx AQx. I think its fine to 'lie' in response to stayman here and bid 2♦. if partner has 4♠ + 5♥, we will get a 2nd chance.