[Free]

My first poll on the new forums, looks like we have new options here

Ok, the question. Suppose you're playing precision where 1♦ opening shows 2+♦ (1NT=14-16 BAL, 2♣=6+cards, 2♦=3-suited short ♦). What does the auction 1♦-1♥-1♠ tell about opener's hand? Does it just show 4♠, or is it only with unbalanced hands? In other words, do you skip ♠ with balanced hands in this situation?

[sty2000]

 Free, on 2010-October-20, 02:27, said:

My first poll on the new forums, looks like we have new options here

Ok, the question. Suppose you're playing precision where 1♦ opening shows 2+♦ (1NT=14-16 BAL, 2♣=6+cards, 2♦=3-suited short ♦). What does the auction 1♦-1♥-1♠ tell about opener's hand? Does it just show 4♠, or is it only with unbalanced hands? In other words, do you skip ♠ with balanced hands in this situation?

I'd say it doesn't have to show real diamonds, just 4 spades, and can be balanced, because 1nt rebid is 12-13 in that case, and you may miss 2♠ contract.

On the other hand, in my own Precision where we play 1NT=12-14, i'd play that sequence shows real diamonds, unbalanced hand, because 1NT rebid would show 15-16 BAL, and partner, who responded to opening almost for sure has invitational hand with 8+ points (else passes), so we can find spades using some kind of checkback sequence.

[dake50]

Shows 4xS any shape. But I like agreeing sty2000 Checkback finds 4xS after bal rebids 1N.

[W Kovacs]

It shows 4xS, nothing more. If partner does have a balanced minimum, though, I'd expect his 4 spades to be pretty good.

[straube]

The main point I see in bypassing 1S to rebid 1N is to show tolerance for responder's hearts (or long minor). It's true that showing an unbalanced hand (via 1S) tends to promise four diamonds, but you still can have 4-1-3-5 so partner can only bank on three.

A minor point might be limiting the hand to something like 11-13 (depending on your NT size) as opposed to maybe 11-15 or so.

Are you trying to relay opener's hand after 1D-1H, 1S? Like 2D asks shape? But you don't really need to omit the balanced hand types. There is room enough to relay the balanced shapes as well.

Have you considered what to rebid with 3-1-5-4 or 3-1-4-5? Rebidding 2C is dangerous because opener may have such shapes as 4-5-3-1 or 4-5-2-2.
Rebid 1S and then checkback later for that fourth spade. The worst that should happen to you is playing a 4-3 spade fit at the 2-level.

[cwiggins]

Opener rebidding 1S only if he is unbalanced and 1NT with all balanced hands--4333, 4432, and 5m332; no singletons--even if he has four spades, leads to easier auctions and wins more times than it loses.

Admittedly you will lose if responder also has 4 spades and less than an invitational hand. But my guess is that responder having 4 spades in addition to his 4+ hearts is not common (25% or less?). Since responder must also be less than invitational, that drives the probability even lower. Moreover, when opener rebids 1NT with 4 spades and responder does not have 4 spades (which is the more frequent situation), you get wins sometimes: you get a lead into your spade suit, or maybe the opponents balance into spades after 1D-1H 1N because spades are safe.

Consider the follow ups based on responder's heart length.

If responder has 6 hearts, it's easier and more accurate to rebid 3H and 4H over 1NT than over 1S. Over 1S, you need to worry about that small singleton or void in opener's hand. Not so over 1NT. And since responder knows that an 8+ card fit exists in hearts, sometimes responder can make an invitational bid over 1NT when it would not be right to do so over 1S.

If responder has 5 hearts and less than 4 spades, responder has an easy rebid over 1NT regardless of strength assuming you are playing almost any type of new minor forcing, two way new minor forcing, or whatever). And if opener has only 2 hearts, you will wind up playing 2H when opener is minimum. On the other hand, after 1D-1H-1S, if 2C is game forcing, you may miss a 5-3 heart fit when opener is minimum and responder is invitational. If 2C is a one round force, you will wind up playing 2NT when opener is minimum and has only two hearts. Simulations show that the 5-2 fit plays better. If 2C is neither, you have other problems.

If responder has 5 hearts and 4 spades, you will find the 4-4 spade fit whenever responder is invitational or better. So the only time you lose is with this distribution is when responder is less than invitational. But if responder is 5-4, it's 2-1 it isn't spades.

If responder has exactly four hearts and is balanced, the rebidding is easy whenter your rebid 1S or 1N.

If responder has three hearts (not a typo), 1NT enables getting to 2D or 3C easily.


1S showing an unbalanced hand with 4 spades means that 1NT will not be passed. So with

♠xx
♥xxxx
♦xxxx
♠xxx

rebid 1NT and opener will bid 2m in his 5+ suit unless he is exactly 4-4-4-1.

Klinger has suggested this approach (1S only with unbalanced hands) in natural systems. With Precision's ambiguous 1D, it seems even more useful. I have sometimes wondered whether it would be even more useful to have a 1S rebid show any unbalanced 2- or 3-suited hand without 4 hearts. But I've never taken the time to work out the details.

[kayin801]

We play always rebid 1♠ with a 4 bagger, even 5432 when we're balanced. Sometimes we even get to play 1♠! and sometimes we can make a preemptive raise with a 3541 hand or something and make it hard for them to find their minor suit fit and compete. It's not like only opener can be unbalanced.

[the hog]

This totally depends on style. I prefer a style which shows that 1D 1H 1S shows D and S and not just any random hand with 4S. I would bid 1NT with a balanced hand in the requisite range.
Chris Wiggins has hit the nail on the head here. Your auctions are easier and your hand types are more clearly defined.
Bidding 1S on a 3 carder playing a big C system, as one poster has suggested, is totally ridiculous, but you know that already, Frederick.

[straube]

Meckwell appear to rebid 1S. Here's a link where they rebid 1S with 4-2-3-4 shape.

http://www.bridgemat...tters/blog.html

That's probably a style thing with them and not looking at what works best.

We only have the agreement to rebid 1S with 3 spades and 3-1-4-5 shape and we can only do that because we check back before committing ourselves to a 4S contract. That lets a 2C rebid over 1H always show 5D/4+C which improves the chance of finding the right strain. It also lets responder use XYZ to show a GI hand with 6 hearts (staying at the 2-level) or 4 spades (staying also at the 2-level). It also lets us get to 1N from responder's side.

I especially think this method is suited for strong club systems although I know that others rebid 1S playing standard after 1C-1H. For instance...
Axx x KQxx Kxxxx





.

[Free]

 The hog, on 2010-October-20, 20:13, said:

This totally depends on style. I prefer a style which shows that 1D 1H 1S shows D and S and not just any random hand with 4S. I would bid 1NT with a balanced hand in the requisite range.
Chris Wiggins has hit the nail on the head here. Your auctions are easier and your hand types are more clearly defined.
Bidding 1S on a 3 carder playing a big C system, as one poster has suggested, is totally ridiculous, but you know that already, Frederick.

If you want 1♠ to show ♦ as well, what do you do with a 4-1-3-5 after 1♦-1♥? (2♣ openings promisse a 6 card, so these are opened 1♦)

[the hog]

 Free, on 2010-October-21, 01:36, said:

If you want 1♠ to show ♦ as well, what do you do with a 4-1-3-5 after 1♦-1♥? (2♣ openings promisse a 6 card, so these are opened 1♦)

Personally I would open that with 2C if the C suit was satisfactory. I think the advantages of showing the unbalanced 2 suiter far outweigh the disadvantages of the 2C opening. Another solution, of course, which a number of players use is the 2M = 10-14 with 4 in the M and 5+C

[mtvesuvius]

I strongly prefer to play this as cwiggins described. My general style is that I don't rebid 1NT on a stiff in partner's suit, and my 1D-1M-non-1N rebids are unbalanced. True, we lose when partner has a <Invitational hand with (3)4 Spades, however, the gain of knowing partner is unbalanced is very big IMO. If responder is GF, they can now find out almost exact shape. A small additional benefit is that often on this auction, the opponents will lead Spades, regardless of whether 1N denied a 4 card spade suit. This has helped me make a countless number of otherwise hopeless 1N contracts. I don't play that 1S promises Diamonds... It simply is an unbalanced hand.

I just don't see the advantage of rebidding 1S with all hands with 4S, we also wrongside 1NT sometimes then.

[straube]

There's no need to sacrifice your 2M openings or lower the requirements for your 2C opening to accommodate a pattern such as 4-1-3-5. Imo, opening 2S with Axxx x Kxx KQxxx is bad bridge.

The truth is that you can rebid 1S or 1N because you have room to sort out opener's hand either way. You can get to the best game either method and the question really is which method leads to the best part scores. I haven't looked at hands but I bet Meckwell have. My preference is to rebid the spades.

Here's how I would continue...

1D-1H, 1S
.....2C-forces 2D to play or make invite
.....2D-GF
..........2H-reverser, 4S/5D
...............2S-relays
..........2S-balanced (4432 or 4333)
...............2N-relays
....................3C-4234
....................3D-4324
....................3H-4243
....................3S-4342
....................3N-4333
..........2N-3-suited
...............3C-relays
....................3D-4-1-4-4
....................3H-4-0-4-5
....................3S-4-0-5-4
..........3C-4-2-2-5
..........3D-3-1-4-5

You can also have abbreviated auctions and/or break relay

1D-1H, 1S-3H shows 5 hearts and a desire to play 4H or 3N
1D-1H, 1S shows 4 spades and wants to play 3N opposite 3-1-4-5

[the hog]

[quote name='straube' timestamp='1287672459' post='503871']
There's no need to sacrifice your 2M openings or lower the requirements for your 2C opening to accommodate a pattern such as 4-1-3-5. Imo, opening 2S with Axxx x Kxx KQxxx is bad bridge.

Have you played Aspro twos? If not, you can't comment sensibly. You are not "sacrificing anything", particularly when you have a multi 2D at your disposal.
Imo bidding 1S on a three carder is not "bad bridge", it is appalling bridge, unless you like playing 3-3 fits.

[straube]

 the hog, on 2010-October-21, 23:13, said:

 straube, on 2010-October-21, 08:47, said:

There's no need to sacrifice your 2M openings or lower the requirements for your 2C opening to accommodate a pattern such as 4-1-3-5. Imo, opening 2S with Axxx x Kxx KQxxx is bad bridge.

Have you played Aspro twos? If not, you can't comment sensibly. You are not "sacrificing anything", particularly when you have a multi 2D at your disposal.
Imo bidding 1S on a three carder is not "bad bridge", it is appalling bridge, unless you like playing 3-3 fits.

Have you played a treatment where you may rebid 1S with 3-1-4-5? If yes then (by your definition) you have played appalling bridge. If no then (by your definition) you cannot comment sensibly.

Perhaps you're not aware, but Meckwell wind up in 3-3 fits sometimes. With 1-4-3-5 opposite 5-3-3-2 their bidding proceeds 1D-1S, 2C-2D. That's unfortunate but not appalling...and they're at the 2-level.

I'm willing to hold opinions on treatments that I haven't played. When I faulted opening 2S with Axxx x Kxx KQxxx I expressed that it was my opinion.

With Axxx x Kxx KQxxx, if I open 2S I'm above my "law level" in spades (which is 1) and above my law level in clubs (which is not quite 2) and I have very little extra in terms of hcps to compensate. I might make 2S or 3C a lot of the time, but my hand has nothing in reserve to support a constructive auction. I can more safely describe this hand by starting with 1D or perhaps 1S or even 2C all depending on our opening requirements for these bids. These bids are less preemptive to the opponents, but I have an opening hand and want to leave room for partner to describe his own hand.

[the hog]

Frankly I am not really interested in what Meckwell does, and I find this constant reference to them tiresome. Try and think for yourself.

[awm]

My preference is to bid up the line on balanced hands here. But I don't think this is totally unrelated to the rest of your system.

If partner has game forcing values, then it makes very little difference what your style is on this issue (you have plenty of space to sort things out). The big differences are going to be in partials and invites. The 1♠ rebid has the advantage of making it much easier to find your spade fits on these sorts of deals, whereas the 1NT rebid makes it easier to reach/evaluate heart fits in a number of sequences. If a 1♠ rebid promises "real diamonds" there is some advantage there as well in letting partner sign off in a 4-4 diamond fit (for example) that otherwise might be hard to reach.

Assuming that you open 1♦ and rebid 1♠ with 4135 shape (as seems to be popular), the 1♠ rebid can't promise "real diamonds" to any great degree. I think this would be a substantial factor in favor of bidding up the line (since one of the big wins from 1♠=unbalanced has been eliminated). The fact that opener is more limited than in standard systems also means that partner can pass 1♠ a lot more often, which is an advantage to bidding 1♠ as often as possible (including balanced hands).