[sl]

For the last 10 months, I've been playing 2/1 GF, with Walsh responses to 1C- opening bids, i.e. responding in 4 card major by-passing diamonds in weaker hands, and opener rebidding 1N possibly concealing 4 card majors in most balanced hands, and that rebid of major shows as a rule unbalanced hand. It seems authorities like Lawrence, Hardy and Bergen all in their writings were proponents of this approach.
Recently, an OKB expert, told me that Walsh responses is not the way to play good bridge... I just want to hear some discussion on this topic. Has there been a trend back to up the line bidding over 1C- opening bids that I have not been aware of? SL

[the hog]

"Recently, an OKB expert, told me that Walsh responses is not the way to play good bridge"

Did you okbridge expert give you a reason for this outlandish statement? I think Walsh, and better still, transfer Walsh, are excellent. Perhaps your expert might care to discuss his reason with the top Italian players at the moment, as most of them play versions of transfer Walsh. Imho the reason that people criticize this method is because they don't understand the rationale behind it - to find a Major fit as quickly as possible on limited hands.

[Yzerman]

Quote

For the last 10 months, I've been playing 2/1 GF, with Walsh responses to 1C- opening bids, i.e. responding in 4 card major by-passing diamonds in weaker hands, and opener rebidding 1N possibly concealing 4 card majors in most balanced hands, and that rebid of major shows as a rule unbalanced hand. It seems authorities like Lawrence, Hardy and Bergen all in their writings were proponents of this approach.

Recently, an OKB expert, told me that Walsh responses is not the way to play good bridge... I just want to hear some discussion on this topic. Has there been a trend back to up the line bidding over 1C- opening bids that I have not been aware of? SL

Here is my take on the subject.  I play the 5 following structures and in combination with each other they are AWESOME;

i) Weak NT
ii) Walsh Style 1C Responses
iii) Two way checkback
iv) Jump shift into other minor as invitational
v) Inverted Minors (single raise game force)

Some of the nuances may not be obvious at first HOWEVER (trust me) these are lethal bidding tools.  For the sake of staying on the topic of Walsh I will cite some examples and auctions that my partner and I utilize;

This may get a bit extreme but is very intuitive in logic.  Here are some "types" of hands to respond to 1C with (remember in weak NT, 1c is one of three hands (1) weak hand with clubs, (2) strong hand with clubs, and (3) strong NT (or 18/19 balanced));

a) Weak hand longer major + 4 diamonds
Weak hand longer diamonds + 4 major
c) Invitational hand longer major + 4 diamonds
d) Invitational hand longer diamonds + major
e) Forcing hand longer (bad) diamonds + 4 major
f) Forcing hand longer (good) diamonds + 4 major
g) Forcing hand longer major + 4 diamonds
h) Forcing hand 5/5 (+) diamonds plus major

For Walsh auctions, lets analyze the above hands (a-h) and see how NICELY they bid with strong NT version of 1C (Strong NT is most common 1C opener - WE WILL USE 2 WAY CHECKBACK FOR STRONG NT ** VERY IMPORTANT);

after 1N then 2C is relay to 2D for ALL invitational hands;

3a - 1c-1M-1N-2M (to play - opener not have 4D for 1C)
3b - 1c-1M-1N-2C-2D (use relay for get out in diam.)
3c - 1c-1M-1N-2C-2D-2M (opener not have 4D)
3d - 1c-1M-1N-2C-2D-3D (invite to 3N)
3e - 1c-1M-1N-2D (game force checkback)
3f - 1c-1d-1N-2M (gf, 5+d and 4M, emphasis on Diam.)
3g - 1c-1M-1N-2D (game force checkback)
3h - 1c-1M-1N-3D (5/5 forcing, good hand)

We put some restrictions on minor suit openings to facilitate problematic hand types.  4/4 minor hands are ALWAYS opened 1C (with obviousl exceptions xxxx AKQJ).  xx45 hands will frequently be opened 1D to facilitate the how comfortable the rebid is for opener.

Another frequent problem with Walsh is how to hands minor 2 suiters as responder (weak, invitational, forcing).  We recently switched to 2 way checkback on this auction as well.  For a number of years we play 1C-1D-1N-2C to play but have recently dismissed that auction (partly because we play weak NT , you cant play 2C with a strong NT opener anyway).  So here is how we handle the minor hands;

a) Weak hand longer diamonds than clubs
Weak hand longer club than diamonds
c) Invite hand longer clubs than diamonds
d) Invite hand longer diamonds than clubs
e) Forcing hand longer diamonds than clubs
f) Forcing hand longer clubs than diamonds

For strong NT 1C hands here are the auctions;

3a) 1C-1D-1N-2C(relay)-2D
3b) 1C-3C (if good clubs)
3b) 1C-1D-1N (if bad clubs - 3C is silly w/bad clubs)
3c) 1C-2D (Criss-Cross)
3d) 1C-1D-1N-2C-2D-3D
3e) 1C-1D-1N-3D
3f) 1C-2C (unconditional game force)

Upon request, or any interest I can review the weak club (1C) opener and strong club (1C) opener (these may or may not have second suits) and follow up auctions with Walsh inferences.

Regards, and I hope someone, somehow may find some value from this.

[the hog]

Yzerman has obviously put a lot of thought into this. As stated in the previous post, I would add transfer Walsh.

1C
1D  t/f to H
1H  T/f to S
1S  t/f to D

Why? Lets say you are playing a 14-16NT.
Now:
A simple accept of the transfer shows 2-3 cards in the t/f suit and a min
A jump accept shows 4 cards in the suit and a min
A new suit shows an unbalanced hand
a 1NT rebid shows 17-19 - note how economical this is without having to bid an ugly 2nt here on an 18-19 count.

If you play a weak nt, the simple acceptance of the transfer shows 15-17, (else you would have opened nt), and a bid of a different suit shows an unbalanced min eg 1C 1D 1S on Axxx x Kxx AQxxx

OK so what DOES the 2nt rebid show?

a) 3 card support for pd, a good 6 card C suit and about 16-17 points; iow the Bridge World hand of death.
OR
18-19 bal with 4 card support for the transferred suit.

3D is a relay over this to discover which holding opener has.

Other sequences:
1C 1D
1H  2C = puppet to 2D - most inv hands
       2D = GF checkback
       3C/D = inv 5/5s

1C  1D
1NT 2C/D = GI/GF checkback as above

We played the above together with Yzerman's 2C and 2D checkback.  My only concern would be whether this is legal in the States - perhaps someone could answer this.

[LukeG]

Quote

We played the above together with Yzerman's 2C and 2D checkback.  My only concern would be whether this is legal in the States - perhaps someone could answer this.

Transfer responses to a natural 1C opening bid are not allowed in GCC events unless the response is game forcing.  However, these responses are legal in MCC events.

[inquiry]

I have play Walsh style for a long, long time. In the past two years, I have switched to the two way checkback and find it quite rewarding, as well. I have just recently been using two way checkback with weak notrump, so I will not comment on the advantages of two way at weak notrump versus strong notrump, or the criss-cross bids (jump in other minor as invite in opened minor). It looks like that when playing weak NT that would be an excellent combination, and I will be trying it shortly in the partnership bidding room to check it out.

So what I want to consider is here is the merit of another type of bid. The use of 2D as the "levy 2D" and 3C (over 1D) as invitiational in clubs, which is the way I play this now.

Levy 2D (I got from "What pro's play" by Stephen Levy) shows either 6+ diamonds and game force hand, or 5+D and 4+ clubs game force. This way, 1C-1D-any-3C is now invintational since 2D was not used. This raises the question as to rather or not two way checkback should be usable on an auction like 1C-1D-1N-?. Playing Levy 2D, the checkback would be off here. 2C/2D both would be to play, 3C/3D would both be invitinational (no jump to 2D originally).

How do  you respond to Levy 2D?  Conventionally off course.
2H=3Clubs minimum opening (playing wk nt this has to change)
2S=4/5 clubs, balanced minimum hand
2NT=big balanced hand 17+
3C=unbalanced, 5+ clubs
3D=3 card support to honor
3H = Spade reverse hand with H splinter
3S= Heart reverse hand with S splinter
3N= Singleton Diamond, reverse stregnth

The levy 2D has served me well playing strong notrump. If you play weak NT, the 2H and 2S bids would have to be modified, as you would have opened 1NT with those hands. So you might try 2H is a normal 1NT opener with 3C, and 2S is normal 1NT with 4/5 clubs. 2NT is too good for strong NT still, and 3C on are unchanged.

The second bid I typically use is 1D-3C as invite with clubs rather than with Diamonds. This is a crutch to allow 1D-2C to be true game force and to avoid some ackward 1NT responses when holding long clubs. I have to admit no fondness for the 3C bid when I make it, as I always wonder if 1D-3C-P will land us in the best spot (and indeed most of the time it does not). The advantage of 1D-3C as an invite when playing weak Notrump seems very clear to me, since partner either has long diamonds or a normal 1NT opener. In which case you a) have a diamond fit and will get to play it, or will get to 3NT.  

I like the last two advantages of criss-cross 1D-3C so much, I am willing to forgo the 1D-2C must be game force dogma to use it when playing weak notrump. In fact, when playing weak notrump and your partner open's 1D, odds are good he already has extra valued (hcp or distribution), that 2C on the hands I leap to 3C on as natural invite are probably good enough to land in game unless partner has no fit at all. Yzerman, how do  you play 1D-2C? When can auction die it 3C or 3D? Can it die in 2NT?

So all in all, yzerman's pattern of bidding with weak notrump looks very well thought out. With weak notrump giving up on Levy 2D isn't that big of a deal. The largest problem I see is the auction 1C-1D-1NT (if not playing Levy 2D), as Yzerman said, he can't play 2C (with diamonds and clubs rather than diamonds and major). Playing Levy 2D you can play 2C or 2D, and still use 3C/3D as invites (since on 2D initially). But the trade off is, your 1C-3C bid becomes much wider. Using Criss-cross 1C-3C is purely preemptive, since 1C-2D is Club invite. At IMPs with a premium on bidding games rather than part-scores, I think criss-cross approach looks better with two way check-back looks better. After all, how much imp damage can be done playing in 1NT or 3C instead of specifically 2C? Maximum of 5 imps (-100 vs +90) on a bad day, and 4 imps (-50 vs +90) on a "good" one.  

[Yzerman]

****
I like the last two advantages of criss-cross 1D-3C so much, I am willing to forgo the 1D-2C must be game force dogma to use it when playing weak notrump. In fact, when playing weak notrump and your partner open's 1D, odds are good he already has extra valued (hcp or distribution), that 2C on the hands I leap to 3C on as natural invite are probably good enough to land in game unless partner has no fit at all. Yzerman, how do  you play 1D-2C? When can auction die it 3C or 3D? Can it die in 2NT?

So all in all, yzerman's pattern of bidding with weak notrump looks very well thought out. With weak notrump giving up on Levy 2D isn't that big of a deal. The largest problem I see is the auction 1C-1D-1NT (if not playing Levy 2D), as Yzerman said, he can't play 2C (with diamonds and clubs rather than diamonds and major). Playing Levy 2D you can play 2C or 2D, and still use 3C/3D as invites (since on 2D initially). But the trade off is, your 1C-3C bid becomes much wider. Using Criss-cross 1C-3C is purely preemptive, since 1C-2D is Club invite. At IMPs with a premium on bidding games rather than part-scores, I think criss-cross approach looks better with two way check-back looks better. After all, how much imp damage can be done playing in 1NT or 3C instead of specifically 2C? Maximum of 5 imps (-100 vs +90) on a bad day, and 4 imps (-50 vs +90) on a "good" one.  

****

1D->2C is NOT game force HOWEVER 2C promises a second bid AND is a hand that would bid game opposite a strong NT (hence only non-GF hand is when opener has weak hand with diamonds and no fit).  You can NEVER play 2NT after 2C response.

We have not decided to TOTALLY abandon the ability to play 2C for we are just now experimenting how two-way checkback works on 1C-1D-1N auctions.  We need to identify the weaknesses and address them but right now we have bought into this.

In the past used 1D response as a tool to get out in 2C (1C-1D-1N-2C = to play, clubs were too weak for 1C-3C).  We had played 1C-3C as preemptive in club suit BUT a hand that would invite 3N due to trick taking potential in club suit (eg  xx xxx xx KQJxxx).  Hence hands with weak clubs not invitational to 3N on tricks would use the phony Walsh 1D (xx Kxx xx Q109xxx , this hand would bid 1C-1D-1N-2C).  This approach was highly valid when playing weak NT for their was no purpose in preempting 3C when partner has a strong NT (we obviously need to rethink this logic in our new agreements).

[Rado]

Hi all,
Just to add one more view in favour of Walsh:
when 4th hand overcalls or preemts our Major suit is already known when we play Walsh and not known when bidding "up the line"
1C-pass-1D-2S-? now it's harder to locate 4-4 H when our combine strength is abt 18-23 points
while:
1C-pass-1H-2S ? here we have simple 3H= fit and abt min, with other bids at level 3 for stronger hands.
When opps continue bidding by 3S or 4S the things go even worse when "up the line" biding.
Anyway playing Walsh requires some additional agreements in other bidding sequences so my advise is to use it only with regular partners.
Best regards, Rado