[kenrexford]

This one is easy. You have two cover cards if partner has 5 diamonds. If partner only has four diamonds, then he only lacks a spade fit when he has 2443 or 2344, and perhaps not the latter if the partnership opens 1♣ with 2344. Most often the time, he has a spade fit when I don't have a diamond fit, and I like my hand for a spade contract.

Worst case is to play diamonds on a Moysian, and that's OK too.

[vuroth]

I understand why people are bidding, but I'll continue to pass tyvm.

At this point, I think bidding would upset partnership trust.

When I get to the point where the main source of IMPs/MPs won/lost is NOT ridiculous bids/plays on one side or the other, maybe I'll revisit this.

[Phil]

Yes I would bid 1♠.

I thought super-light responses required a pre-alert in some instances. For instance, I know on the USBF website, many pairs pre-alert that they respond very lightly.

Whether or not this is a question of 'style' or something conventional is something I'm not qualified to comment on.

[cherdanno]

Maybe superlight responses require pre-alerts, but this hand isn't superlight!!! Whatever partner raises me to in spades, I expect to make. If he bids any level of diamonds, there is a good chance he will make.

[CSGibson]

whereagles, on Apr 29 2009, 11:32 AM, said:

Sometimes the word "always" is appropriate. As in, "the only rule that always works is to think"

unless your thinking gives opps the information they need to play the hand...

[whereagles]

CSGibson, on Apr 30 2009, 02:40 AM, said:

whereagles, on Apr 29 2009, 11:32 AM, said:

Sometimes the word "always" is appropriate. As in, "the only rule that always works is to think"

unless your thinking gives opps the information they need to play the hand...

If you always think, they won't be able to tell one situation from the other

[Old York]

I like the idea of bidding, but I hate the idea of bidding twice to show both majors.
I would respond 1♥ which gives us plenty of room to find a Heart fit, Diamond fit or a superb 5-4 Spade fit. I think it is unlikely that a 5-3 Spade fit will be found at a low level

Tony

[655321]

1♠, I very much prefer to respond on these unbalanced hands.

But 1♥ is a silly bid IMO.

[y66]

Good problem. I like the arguments for bidding 1S with the given hand and with even fewer values mentioned by apollo81, fred and others. Will save this one for partnership discussion.

[neilkaz]

y66, on Apr 30 2009, 08:56 AM, said:

Good problem. I like the arguments for bidding 1S with the given hand and with even fewer values mentioned by apollo81, fred and others. Will save this one for partnership discussion.

To those who would respond with fewer values than the OP weak hand, what do you do when PD rebids 2NT and how do you like things if PD jumps shifts 3♣?

[Hanoi5]

I voted for Pass and unfortunately I must recognize that on some situations I would bid 1♠ (and I might even try 1♥!). If partner had opened 1♣ I'd be more prompt to bid but as I don't find the 1♦ contract to be that bad, and as I have the Majors passing doesn't seem SO bad.

[Old York]

Hanoi5, on Apr 30 2009, 03:37 PM, said:

If partner had opened 1♣ I'd be more prompt to bid

This is a very interesting twist. I would be much more likely to pass if partner opened 1♣. The only reason I considered bidding was because we had a partial fit in Diamonds, so a 2♦ rebid would not worry me

This hand is worth 6 points in any suit contract except Clubs, so is worth a response to 1♦. If partner opens 1♣, however, the hand is a badly fitting 3 points, so I would be happy to defend if oppo bid, and would be much better placed on the second round when 4th seat re-opens with a double etc

Tony