Help
With
OR
Is walsh still walsh or is it standard
#1
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 272
- Joined: 2005-May-17
Posted 2006-February-28, 10:44
You're opener. You say 1c, partner replies 1d and you say ?
With
OR
With
OR
http://badmonsters.blogspot.com probably will not change your life.
#2 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2006-February-28, 10:47
I do not consider Walsh to be standard, so if I was playing with a pickup partner I would bid 1H with these hands unless we had agreed on walsh.
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 5,577
- Joined: 2005-March-01
- Gender:Male
- Location:Erlangen, Germany
-
Interests:Astronomy, Mathematics
Nuclear power
Posted 2006-February-28, 10:56
Ditto, except that I would bid 1♠ and not 1♥ on the first hand 
#4 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2006-February-28, 10:58
Gerben42, on Feb 28 2006, 11:56 AM, said:
Ditto, except that I would bid 1♠ and not 1♥ on the first hand
lol, you know what I meant
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,650
- Joined: 2005-June-15
- Gender:Male
- Location:Canada
- Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.
Posted 2006-February-28, 11:00
Justin is correct (again.... 
)
What you rebid on these hands is essentially a question of partnership agreement. There is no absolute 'right' way: only a choice of agreements, with the 'correct' way being to play according to those agreements.
I am very much opposed to up the line bidding, but I would bid up the line if playing with an unknown partner with who I have had no discussion. If playing in any of my established partnerships, I rebid 1N with both.
)What you rebid on these hands is essentially a question of partnership agreement. There is no absolute 'right' way: only a choice of agreements, with the 'correct' way being to play according to those agreements.
I am very much opposed to up the line bidding, but I would bid up the line if playing with an unknown partner with who I have had no discussion. If playing in any of my established partnerships, I rebid 1N with both.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
#6
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,290
- Joined: 2004-May-03
- Gender:Male
- Location:London, England
Posted 2006-February-28, 11:21
I would have bid my major playing SAYC and 1NT playing 2/1 GF. Sounds from the posts above that maybe I overestimate the number of 2/1ers who play Walsh.
I vote that we make transfer responses to 1♣ our standard, then it is obvious what to bid
I vote that we make transfer responses to 1♣ our standard, then it is obvious what to bid
#7
- Limit bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,482
- Joined: 2004-November-02
- Gender:Female
- Location:England
- Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those
Posted 2006-February-28, 11:36
Except that you then have to define continuations. I know of two distinct and fully thought-out schemes, totally different, and I'm sure there are more.
#8
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,779
- Joined: 2003-October-07
- Gender:Male
Posted 2006-February-28, 12:30
I always assume Walsh/game force style in my no discussion, no agreements pick up partnerships. Surprisingly this is usually the least of our bidding issues.
#9
- Under bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 11,797
- Joined: 2004-July-25
- Gender:Male
- Location:Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Posted 2006-February-28, 13:57
I bid 1NT without discussion when I agreed to play 2/1. I'm not sure what BBO advanced says, it would be worthwhile to look at it.
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.
- hrothgar
- hrothgar
#10
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,151
- Joined: 2003-June-11
- Location:Southern California
Posted 2006-February-28, 15:26
If I'm playing more than 10 boards with someone, I'll bring this up.
I don't consider either a 1♥ or a 1N rebid (with the subject hand) "standard", any more than I consider 1♣ - 1♦ as denying a 4 card major if less than an opening bid as "standard".
They are both playable methods and if you were to ask a random sample of experts in different parts of the country, or the world for that matter, I would expect a lot of different answers.
Southern California is Walsh country, especially with the older players, so a 1N rebid with both hands would be pretty common.
I don't consider either a 1♥ or a 1N rebid (with the subject hand) "standard", any more than I consider 1♣ - 1♦ as denying a 4 card major if less than an opening bid as "standard".
They are both playable methods and if you were to ask a random sample of experts in different parts of the country, or the world for that matter, I would expect a lot of different answers.
Southern California is Walsh country, especially with the older players, so a 1N rebid with both hands would be pretty common.
"Phil" on BBO
#11
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,656
- Joined: 2005-February-09
- Gender:Male
- Location:Zurich, Switzerland
Posted 2006-February-28, 15:39
If I agreed to play "standard" or "sayc" then I would assume no Walsh.
If I agreed to play "2/1" or "BWS" then I would assume Walsh.
Of course, it is perfectly possible to play "standard with Walsh" or "2/1 without Walsh" but my impression is that these are the more likely scenarios.
If I agreed to play "2/1" or "BWS" then I would assume Walsh.
Of course, it is perfectly possible to play "standard with Walsh" or "2/1 without Walsh" but my impression is that these are the more likely scenarios.
Adam W. Meyerson
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#12
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,082
- Joined: 2006-January-23
Posted 2006-February-28, 15:44
awm, on Feb 28 2006, 04:39 PM, said:
If I agreed to play "standard" or "sayc" then I would assume no Walsh.
If I agreed to play "2/1" or "BWS" then I would assume Walsh.
Of course, it is perfectly possible to play "standard with Walsh" or "2/1 without Walsh" but my impression is that these are the more likely scenarios.
If I agreed to play "2/1" or "BWS" then I would assume Walsh.
Of course, it is perfectly possible to play "standard with Walsh" or "2/1 without Walsh" but my impression is that these are the more likely scenarios.
Is Walsh really part of BWS? I might have missed that change. I am pretty sure BWS style is:
1M over 1C with 4D and 4 in M and less than a game invite. With longer diamonds, or 9+/10+ points you bid 1D. Opener, consequently, does not normally bypass majors to rebid 1N (except maybe on a 4333 hand?).
#13
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,290
- Joined: 2004-May-03
- Gender:Male
- Location:London, England
Posted 2006-February-28, 16:49
Yup, that is still the case Josh. Opener only bypasses a 4 card major if 4333.
#14
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,151
- Joined: 2003-June-11
- Location:Southern California
Posted 2006-February-28, 17:06
And BWS is a semiforcing NT too, with Lawrence influences.
"Phil" on BBO
#15
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,554
- Joined: 2005-April-25
Posted 2006-February-28, 17:12
so in walsh is
1nt 8-10hcp
and 1♦ is either weaker or promises another bid.
so if i were playing walsh i would bid 1nt, not playing that with someone who was a pickup i would bid a 4 card major over 1♦
1nt 8-10hcp
and 1♦ is either weaker or promises another bid.
so if i were playing walsh i would bid 1nt, not playing that with someone who was a pickup i would bid a 4 card major over 1♦
#16
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 272
- Joined: 2005-May-17
Posted 2006-February-28, 18:38
Is it standard for most 2/1 players?
http://badmonsters.blogspot.com probably will not change your life.
#17
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,082
- Joined: 2006-January-23
Posted 2006-February-28, 19:22
pigpenz, on Feb 28 2006, 06:12 PM, said:
so in walsh is
1nt 8-10hcp
and 1♦ is either weaker or promises another bid.
so if i were playing walsh i would bid 1nt, not playing that with someone who was a pickup i would bid a 4 card major over 1♦
1nt 8-10hcp
and 1♦ is either weaker or promises another bid.
so if i were playing walsh i would bid 1nt, not playing that with someone who was a pickup i would bid a 4 card major over 1♦
I wouldn't quite say that. If you hold xxx xx KQJxx Kxx its normal to bid 1D over 1C and let partner declarer NT. I am also not positive if the 1C-1N as 8-10 is std walsh or not. I think its just an optional add on that can be played with walsh or std.
#18
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 104
- Joined: 2004-February-04
Posted 2006-March-01, 06:07
i hate to sound beginner, but what is walsh?
Make love, not war
#19 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2006-March-01, 08:48
AceOfHeart, on Mar 1 2006, 07:07 AM, said:
i hate to sound beginner, but what is walsh?
Basically a style where you bypass diamonds in all weak hands after a 1C opener to bid a 4 card major. Thus over a 1D response opener will also bypass a major suit to rebid 1N with a balanced hand since if partner has a 4 card major he will bid again over 1N since he has a good hand, so you will find your fit.
#20
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,341
- Joined: 2004-July-02
- Location:Millburn, New Jersey
- Interests:Rowing. Wargaming. Military history.
Posted 2006-March-01, 09:27
>Basically a style where you bypass diamonds in all weak hands after a 1C opener to bid a 4 card major.
What is the strength cut off? At what point would you respond 1♦ rather than 1 ♥/♠?
What is the strength cut off? At what point would you respond 1♦ rather than 1 ♥/♠?