[kgr]

Walsh
If you play Walsh and bid 1M and later bid 2♦ then that would typically show a weak hand with 4cM and longer ♦?

---

IMP's:
1♣-(Pass)-1♥-(1♠)
Pass-(1NT)-2♦-(Pass)
??
Is Pass 100% clear here?
Note: We also play support DBL's, so partner can still be 5-5 or 4-6.
Maybe this is all Clear and pass is 100%; would it also be at MP's?

[mike777]

kgr, on 2011-February-27, 04:57, said:

Walsh
If you play Walsh and bid 1M and later bid 2♦ then that would typically show a weak hand with 4cM and longer ♦?

---

IMP's:
1♣-(Pass)-1♥-(1♠)
Pass-(1NT)-2♦-(Pass)
??
Is Pass 100% clear here?
Note: We also play support DBL's, so partner can still be 5-5 or 4-6.
Maybe this is all Clear and pass is 100%; would it also be at MP's?

yes...

that means with a stronger hand with h and d you need to bid something other than 2d here.

Note if opp had not bid 1s you could play xyz here to show 4h and long d.
With all of that said this is a rare auction and playing Walsh it is easy to lose the diamond suit.

This is really the only way to show a weak hand with 4h and long d. You can x with a good hand.

[Free]

There is something to be said about still playing XYZ when you can. In that case 2♦ is still seminatural and forcing while opener already denied a 3 card support.

The ♣s were AJT98 btw

[kgr]

Free, on 2011-February-28, 03:27, said:

There is something to be said about still playing XYZ when you can. In that case 2♦ is still seminatural and forcing while opener already denied a 3 card support.

What is XYZ?

Free, on 2011-February-28, 03:27, said:

The ♣s were AJT98 btw

(I passed and 2♦ made. At the other table they did go down in a higher contract)
I didn't know that the deals were the same at all places.

[Free]

kgr, on 2011-February-28, 06:34, said:

What is XYZ?

XYZ