Posted 2006-September-03, 17:10
This one deal provides a world of useful discussion.
First, I prefer using a Weinstein-Garner-Fallenius-Welland 1♦ opening, showing an unbalanced hand. This little change allows a simple raise of 1♠ to 2♠ on this hand, as the values from the stiff are already on the table This would allow a cuebidding sequence starting at a very low level.
Second, I also like the Golady 2♣ response to a 1♦ opening, to set a game force on these types of hands (artificial, GF, no 5-card major). Opener can the use transfers (2♦), hear 2♠ from Responder, and then agree spades while simultaneuously revealing the exact pattern.
Using the two together produces a neat result, especially if you add well-defined Picture Jumps.
The auction I would ideally have:
1♦ (4+ diamonds, unbalanced)
2♣ (Art., GF, no 5-card major)
2♦ (4+♦/4♥)
2♠ (4♠, no ♥ fit)
4♥ (Three of the top four hearts, two of the top three spades, no diamond control (missing the Ace and King), and, per force, a stiff club, but not the stiff Ace or King)
5♦ (asking bid -- how good are your diamonds?)
5♠ (I have the diamond Queen, but I lack the heart Ace -- but you already knew that).
At this point, if I am ultra conservative, I might want to direct us into the contract (6♦ or 6♠) where the Jack is, had I not held the trump Jack, but bidding 5NT. Partner would bid 6♣ without the spade Jack, or 6♦ with the spade Jack. I would know if spades were solid; if not, I'd try 6♦ and hope.
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."
-P.J. Painter.