[pclayton]

Jlall, on Sep 14 2005, 11:29 AM, said:

pclayton, on Sep 14 2005, 11:20 AM, said:

We also play walsh rebids so opener with a 4405 doesn't have to worry about missing spades since pard won't have them unless he has an invite or better.

<snip>

So 1♠ by responder tends to show something like: Axxx, xxx, KQxxx, x. Its a hand you can't unilaterally invite on, since pard hasn't defined his strength yet - although if pard has the 15-17 variety, you will get interested.

These seem to contradict each other.

why's that?

[mikeh]

Lots of issues here.

I like the use of 1♠ as FSF, with no reference to nor denial of ♠.

I saw that Bob McPhee liks to use 2♠ as gf. I strongly disagree: why use a method that destroys your own bidding space on complex gf hands? Think about opener's rebids after an ambiguous gf 1♠... you are assured of establishing fits or lack thereof lower after 1♠ than after 2♠ (provided that, like me, opener never jumps beyond 2♠ without very clearly defined hands).

Hannie and others discuss xyz.

For those who think that one can usefully play 2♣ and 2♦ as artificial, after the start 1♣ 1♦ 1♥, please advise of your preferred treatment for responder holding, as examples, xx xx KQxxx QJxx or xx xx KQ10xxx Kxx or similar constructions.

I have only played xyz a few times, but when I did, it was used after a 1♠ rebid: there being no need when 1♠ was available

Hannie also sugested that there is a growing trend to use 1♣ 1♦ 1N as 17-19 or 18-19.

What does one rebid with 5332 hands after opening 1♣, if one is out of range for 1N yet less than the 17-19 range?

And why would one do this? It does not 'solve' any problem hand: there is no problem showing 4Major 5Minor hands in 'standard' methods, provided one uses reasonably sophisticated agreements.

As to the actual question: I rebid 2♣, and would ask any who vote otherwise both 'why not 2♣?' and 'how does your rebid advance the auction?'

Notrump clearly should be played by partner: xx is not a reliable stopper, nor a holding your partner will expect for notrump.

No other suit makes any sense whatsoever.

After $SF, opener should strive to combine two purposes: one is to describe the hand held, and the other is to bid as cheaply as is consistent with accurate description. There is no need to preempt oneself before finding out WHY partner thinks his hand is worth a game force.

[han]

Phil's second post was a bit of a reaction to mine, in which I proposed not to play a strict Walsh style. In any case you can play 1S as NF, whether you play it invitational or wider ranging (constructive to invitational). I like the example hand Phil gives, Axxx xxx KQxxx x, it would be hard to describe this hand well if you have to start with 1S.


BTW Phil, I don't mind if you call me Hans, but my name is Han. It's an uncommon name in the US, but quite common in the Netherlands, and also in several Asian countries and in the future according to George Lucas.

[mike777]

mikeh, on Sep 14 2005, 03:35 PM, said:

Lots of issues here.

Hannie and others discuss xyz.

For those who think that one can usefully play 2♣ and 2♦ as artificial, after the start 1♣ 1♦ 1♥, please advise of your preferred treatment for responder holding, as examples, xx xx KQxxx QJxx or xx xx KQ10xxx Kxx or similar constructions.

I have only played xyz a few times, but when I did, it was used after a 1♠ rebid: there being no need when 1♠ was available

1c=1d=1h promises 5 clubs and 4 hearts.

Playing XYZ with your example hands:
2c=puppet to 2d and you can pass if you so choose.

1c=1d=1h=3c=sign off in clubs.
1c=1d=1h=2c=2d=3d=invite.
with some off shape 2-4-2-5 hands you may choose to open 1nt.

Of course responder hands with 4 spades and long minor invite can be a problem with this style. At the table the usual solution is:
1) Active opp's overcall and you can just bid normal, old fashion.
2) You rebid 2nt.

[pclayton]

I think I see where the gap is: Per JL:

first you say pard wont have 4 spades with a 1D bid unless he has invitational or better.

♦'s aren't bypassed with 8-9 point hand. These hands would invite opposite a 15-17 1N rebid. The problem we ran into would be when we went up the line with diamonds with a very weak hand (5-7) opener would skip the major (s) to show the balanced 15-17, and we'd lose the fit.


next you say that you only bypass diamonds if you have 5-7, and it is possible to have a hand with diamonds and spades that you cannot "unilaterally invite" on (whatever that means, doesn't invite mean you are doing something that is not unilateral?).

That seems to be a contradiction, but ok.

Similar to the other point, an 8-9 point hand can't invite unless its opposite a 15-17 or so. When Opener rebids 1 of a major, we consider a hand worth an invitation to be about you'd make with a limit raise, even though Opener could hold the 15-17 type hand. 'Unilaterally invite' would be a hand that can invite opposite any 1♣ opener.

Probably not the best phrasing I know.

[Fluffy]

Well, for those of us who play 1♥ as showing unbalanced hand it should be an obvious 2♥ rebid showing 2425 15-17 if you don't play that then you probably play 1♠ as natural , or so I think.

[Gerben42]

I play 1♠ as "vague", i.e. "partner I'm stuck, please describe what you have. Promises either ♠ or GF values but not both. 2♠ shows both.