[H_KARLUK]

Scoring: IMP

---

1♦   P   1♠   P
2♣   P   ?

Your technical analyses please.
Thanks

[TylerE]

Abstain. Hate 1♠. What's wrong with 1♥?

[H_KARLUK]

TylerE, on Feb 10 2009, 05:14 PM, said:

Abstain. Hate 1♠. What's wrong with 1♥?

Good question. Perhaps responder tried to avoid problematic responder's reverse or FSF for later stages. I know complete deal and auction. And I really wonder post-mortem over double dummy. For now let's try to find a bid please.
Thanks
Hamdi

[hrothgar]

H_KARLUK, on Feb 10 2009, 06:21 PM, said:

TylerE, on Feb 10 2009, 05:14 PM, said:

Abstain. Hate 1♠. What's wrong with 1♥?

Good question. Perhaps responder tried to avoid problematic responder's reverse or FSF for later stages. I know complete deal and auction. And I really wonder post-mortem over double dummy. For now let's try to find a bid please.
Thanks
Hamdi

I think that you are stuck rebidding 2NT

I suspect that Tyler was advocating a 1♥ response because he was ANTICIPATING the problems that a 4th suit forcing auction would present...

This hand isn't strong enough to show both Hearts and Spades. A 1♥ response gives opener the opportunity to respond 1♠ on the first round.

[helene_t]

Pass

[rogerclee]

TylerE, on Feb 10 2009, 08:14 AM, said:

Abstain. Hate 1♠. What's wrong with 1♥?

LOL

[OleBerg]

A popular treatment here in DK, is to have 3♥ showing 5-5 and invitational values. I don't know how hot it is, but at least it describes the hand.

[mike777]

H_KARLUK, on Feb 10 2009, 10:03 AM, said:

<!-- ONEHAND begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> Dealer: </td> <td> West </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Vul: </td> <td> Both </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Scoring: </td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </span> </th> <td> A8432 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> KJT95 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> 5 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> T8 </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- ONEHAND end -->

1♦   P   1♠   P
2♣   P   ?

Your technical analyses please.
Thanks

Many in the Forum play reverse flannery here with that responder hand.


1minor=2h=4+h and 5+s..less than invite.

[OleBerg]

Another approach, only played by one pair in DK as far as i know, is this:

1♦ -2♦ = Inverted minor or 5-5 in the majors, less than a gameforce.

Goes for 1♣ - 2♣ too. Called "ToMax".

[H_KARLUK]

Scoring: IMP

---

1♦   P   1♠   P
2♣   AP

As we looked records seems that hand played in an international event some time ago. In respect to privacy sorry I cannot post names and sources.

However, in our team practice&analyse we also couldn't find some healthy logic. That's why i thought perhaps it would be suitable to ask players from other countries ideas.

Thanks.

[Stephen Tu]

Can't believe there are people advocating 1♥. Doesn't that miss a ton of 5-3 spade fits? Auction 1♦-1♠-1nt allowing you to get to 2h/2s should be a lot more common than the actual auction.

Obviously playing responder's reverse flannery will work on this hand. As would responder just randomly overbidding.

Otherwise the only way to get to a heart partial in my view is for opener to rebid 1nt, playing a style where it's OK to rebid it with a singleton spade a min hand, reserving 2c for hands with extra values/shape.

[TylerE]

1♦ - 1♥
2♥ (1) - 3/4♥ (Depending on how enthusiastic you feel...)

(1) - If there was ever a hand to raise with 3 card support, it's this one.

[Stephen Tu]

For those advocating 1♥, explain how this works better when opener is 3154 shape instead.

[hrothgar]

Stephen Tu, on Feb 10 2009, 10:21 PM, said:

For those advocating 1♥, explain how this works better when opener is 3154 shape instead.

Far be it for me to speak for those advocating 1♥, however, I don't think that the purpose is to score better on hands suitable for a 3 card (or even a 4 card raise)

I suspect that the allure of 1♥ has to do with catering for a 1♠ rebid by opener...

[jdonn]

hrothgar, on Feb 10 2009, 02:24 PM, said:

Stephen Tu, on Feb 10 2009, 10:21 PM, said:

For those advocating 1♥, explain how this works better when opener is 3154 shape instead.

Far be it for me to speak for those advocating 1♥, however, I don't think that the purpose is to score better on hands suitable for a 3 card (or even a 4 card raise)

I suspect that the allure of 1♥ has to do with catering for a 1♠ rebid by opener...

Likewise I'm not advocating the bid, but I think the point is to cater to a 2♣ or 2♦ rebid by opener.

If you bid 1♠ you will not find a 5-3 or 5-4 heart fit after a 2♣ or 2♦ rebid.

If you bid 1♥ you will not find a 5-3 spade fit after any rebid.

If the hand was weaker and still had bad spades and good hearts, say xxxxx KJT9x x xx, then I think 1♥ has a lot going for it. If partner is rebidding 1NT then the opponents can surely make something in a minor, and if LHO is going to overcall then you are often glad you bid your best suit.

[mikeh]

1♥ 'works' only if partner would raise hearts AND would otherwise make an unfortunate call over 1♠.

So 1♥ 'works' if opener is 1354 or 1444.. and even then only if opener would not rebid 1N: a lot of players, these days, will rebid 1N on these patterns.

In the meantime, 1♥ leaves us poorly placed if he rebids 1N (and since 1N rates to be the most common rebid, this is a non-trivial issue)

It is also poor if:

1. he has 3 spades and fewer than 3 hearts
2. he has a big hand... and jumps to 3♦ or 2N
3. Depending on your tolerance for bidding 1♠ then 2♥ over a 2♦ rebid

In my view, with this hand a response of 1♥ is extremely poor.

Yes, on the actual hand, assuming opener would not rebid 1N (and I wouldn't), we regret not responding 1♥. So what?

And the answer, of course, is to play different methods... a 2♥ response is playable here, as 5+ spades and 4+ hearts with a weak hand... this would be a super-max for me playing that gadget, but it definitely 'works' infinitely better than that woeful 1♥

On the actual hand, given that system forced the 1♠, I would have bid 2♦. But, in my partnerships, we almost never open 1♦ and rebid 2♣ on 4=5 hands.. and the upside is that partner is allowed to take another call with significant extras... if he bids 2N, for example, I will bid 4♥.

[jdonn]

mikeh, on Feb 10 2009, 04:00 PM, said:

So 1♥ 'works' if opener is 1354 or 1444.. and even then only if opener would not rebid 1N: a lot of players, these days, will rebid 1N on these patterns.

(Reitterating that I would have responded 1♠ on the actual hand, not 1♥)
It also works when opener rebids his minor. For example 1363 or 1462, 1♦ 1♠ 2♦ 2♥ is forcing and could get you very high with no fit if opener has the wrong shape. 1♦ 1♥ 2♥ is much nicer. So I think it has more upside than you give credit for.

[Fluffy]

I though 2♥ followed by 3♥ was limit 5-5 for most people. It is an overbid of couse, but it is so so much better than 2NT.


1♥ is the big winner when partner is 1453. 2♦ = 90 vs 4♥ 620 booted us from the qualifying in 2005's Transnational in Estoril.


Also a point for bidding 1♥ is that you can rebid 2♥ after 2♣, but rebidding spades is very sick.

[Lobowolf]

jdonn, on Feb 10 2009, 04:05 PM, said:

mikeh, on Feb 10 2009, 04:00 PM, said:

So 1♥ 'works' if opener is 1354 or 1444.. and even then only if opener would not rebid 1N: a lot of players, these days, will rebid 1N on these patterns.

(Reitterating that I would have responded 1♠ on the actual hand, not 1♥)
It also works when opener rebids his minor. For example 1363 or 1462, 1♦ 1♠ 2♦ 2♥ is forcing and could get you very high with no fit if opener has the wrong shape. 1♦ 1♥ 2♥ is much nicer. So I think it has more upside than you give credit for.

It also works when opener has 4 spades.

I, also, would have bid 1♠.

[jdonn]

Lobowolf, on Feb 10 2009, 04:29 PM, said:

It also works when opener has 4 spades.

"Works" is shorthand for "works better than responding 1♠ works", which I thought was obvious from the context.