[mike777]

Why should 1s be forcing....1h can be on zero pts and zero clubs. See Kokish articles.

In fact Kokish recommends bidding something NV with zero pts and any number of clubs.

Forcing to what?

[awm]

I actually greatly prefer the 1♠ rebid as non-forcing. To summarize the reasoning:

The non-forcing 1♠ will help every time 1♠ is a good spot. Since most opening hands are in the minimum range and most of us respond fairly freely on 5-7 hcp (or even less) this is not a particularly rare event. I've won a lot of MPs (and a fair number of IMPs) stopping in 1♠ when others end up in a poor contract in notrump or 2M.

When will the non-forcing 1♠ hurt? In principle it could be on hands where opener has a game force and must bid 2♠ (eating some space) instead of 1♠. Of course, opener having a game force opposite a one-level response is a pretty rare event (keep in mind I'll rebid the non-forcing 1♠ with 18-19 balanced or equivalent). Even when this does come up, the jump to 2♠ creates a game forcing auction, whereas the forcing 1♠ bid will still leave opener needing to make some awkward bid in a later round to show strength. Losing one level of bidding to establish a game force isn't necessarily even a loss.

Of course, I suppose the 2♠ rebid can no longer be used for artificial purposes. But this seems like a small loss (not to mention relatively nonstandard).

[the hog]

Where it will cost is in constructive bidding, in that the jump to 2S takes up a lot of room.
Kokish's comments aside, I would not respond with 0 points and some number of Hearts for example. There is a big difference between philosophy on this side of the world. I honestly know of NO experts here who respond with 0 points, and the logic behind doing so still escapes me.

When you say "forcing to what?", Mike, it is a one round force at least. Do you truly expect to buy the contract in 1S even if that might be the best spot? Also don't forget that most experts here would open 1C and rebid 1NT over 1H with say a xxxx xxx xxx xxx shape, and not 1S. The rationale behind this is to treat a balanced hand as a balanced hand. To bid 2 suits shows 9+ cards in those suits , thus the sequence 1C 1H 1S shows a 4xx5 shape - VERY rarely 4xx4. Playing this style, it means that it is far more logical for 1S to be forcing - responder would give preference to 2C rather than pass 1S holding say a 3442 shape.

[awm]

My observations have been that while Walsh style responses enjoy a slight majority of expert followers over up-the-line bidding, a significant percentage of Walsh bidders will still bid 1♠ over 1m-1♥ on a balanced hand. I'd say more than half the expert community bids 1♠ on 4(23)4 after 1♣-1♥ -- your observations may differ but in any case these observations (from any of us) are more conjecture than backed up by solid evidence.

There are many advantages to bidding a non-forcing 1♠ with spades. It helps substantially in partscore bidding, in that:

(1) You get to play 1♠ instead of 1NT or 2NT or 2♣, when it's right.
(2) You find the 4-4 spade fit (if any) when responder is less than invitational.

Of course, this is a bigger deal at matchpoints, and I know the textbook response "matchpoints is not real bridge." While I dispute that premise, I'd also point out that rebidding 1♠ allows you to right-side 3NT, or avoid 3NT, when there's an issue with the other minor. This sort of thing can swing a lot of imps. And it's not going to greatly effect your slam bidding, since there's plenty of space over 1♠ to relay out opener's full shape regardless of whether 4(23)4 and 4333 patterns are included.

What about the 2♠ rebid? Well certainly you're a level higher, but consider an auction like:

1♣ - 1♥; 1♠ (forcing) - 1NT

At this point opener wants to force to game. How do we do this? Presumably 2♣ is a 4-6, 2♦ shows a 4045? 2♥ would show extras but be non-forcing? 2♠ shows a 5-6? 2NT non-forcing invite? 3♣ non-forcing invite? Seems like opener needs to do some jumping around here to establish a game force: perhaps 3♦ shows game values with concern about diamonds and 3♥ shows 4315-ish game force? Are we really better off here than after 1♣-1♥; 2♠-2NT-3♦/♥?

[HeartA]

I am really surprised to see so many "experts" here chose to rebid S (1S or 2S) while ignoring 8-card bag. You can't afford to shorten your trump (assume S) if C suit can't setup. And you can't afford to shorten trump if you need to run your C suit. Unless pd has 5-card S, in which case she would respond 1S, I will completely ignore the S suit no matter how good it is.

[whereagles]

huh? The hand has the TOP clubs. That makes all the difference: give pard as little as

Axxx
xxxx
xxxx
x

and 6♠ is 60%+, while 6♣ requires clubs 2-2 (40%). If opener had, say,

AKQx
x
--
KQJTxxxx

THEN clubs play better due to the risk of red-suit forces.