[Codo]

OleBerg, on Jul 14 2009, 04:18 AM, said:

ArtK78, on Jul 13 2009, 07:28 PM, said:

Agree with Pass and then 4♠.

I do not understand making a free bid on this hand over 1♥.  But I see this all the time in these Fora.

But seriously; the key to understand 1♠, is to consider how unlikely it is to get hurt, and how likely it is to gain a profit.
If partner has a balanced hand, you will seldom get into trouble (Unless partner partner can be 15-17 bal. in which case you need some agreements to slow him down), and if partner has an unbalanced hand with 5+ clubs, your playing strength surely warrants competing, often even to the 3-level.

You are oversimplyfing.

When you bid one spade with this hand and with a hand with full values, you may get hurt badly.
Not when you have a fit, but when you do not have one at once.

Let the bidding be:
1♣ (1♥) 1♠ (4♥)

And partner has a good hand with about 2 or 3 tricks against heart but no spade fit and no self sufficent club suit.

WHat shall he do? Double? Pass?

Opposite the Arts and mes of this world, he can easily double because he knows that 1 ♠ promies at least some values.

I do not want to compare the pros and cons of the new and the ancient approach, but up to now I see these bids with realy weak hands more in the fora and in junior bridge then in senior competions.

[gnasher]

OleBerg, on Jul 13 2009, 08:18 PM, said:

But seriously; the key to understand 1♠, is to consider how unlikely it is to get hurt, and how likely it is to gain a profit.
If partner has a balanced hand, you will seldom get into trouble

If partner has 12-14 balanced you'll probably be OK. If, on the other hand, he has 18-19 balanced, it will go
  1♣ 1♥ 1♠ pass
  2NT
The only good thing about this sequence is that we're not vulnerable.

[cherdanno]

gnasher, on Jul 14 2009, 03:08 AM, said:

OleBerg, on Jul 13 2009, 08:18 PM, said:

But seriously; the key to understand 1♠, is to consider how unlikely it is to get hurt, and how likely it is to gain a profit.
If partner has a balanced hand, you will seldom get into trouble

If partner has 12-14 balanced you'll probably be OK. If, on the other hand, he has 18-19 balanced, it will go
  1♣ 1♥ 1♠ pass
  2NT
The only good thing about this sequence is that we're not vulnerable.

I would say this counts as "seldom". Seldom compared to how often we may gain competitively when partner is unbalanced. (If we play 3♣ over 2N as non-forcing, I don't even see the problem.)

[gnasher]

cherdanno, on Jul 14 2009, 10:58 AM, said:

I would say this counts as "seldom". Seldom compared to how often we may gain competitively when partner is unbalanced.

I thought we were talking about the risk of getting into trouble given that partner is balanced? Obviously if you include the unbalanced hands the overall probability of this situation is reduced, though it's hard to estimate the relative probabilities.

Quote

(If we play 3♣ over 2N as non-forcing, I don't even see the problem.)

In how many partnership do you play 3♣ as non-forcing?

I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't bid 1♠ - I'd bid it - but I don't think we should dismiss the disadvantages.

[quiddity]

How far would you take this bid? Last night I held T87xxx xx xx Q9x on the same auction and tried 1S. It was not a success (partner had the 18-19 1444 hand).

Edited: sorry, 1435. After she jumped to 2nt there wasn't much to be done (except count myself lucky she didn't try 3nt).

[OleBerg]

Codo, on Jul 14 2009, 10:01 AM, said:

OleBerg, on Jul 14 2009, 04:18 AM, said:

ArtK78, on Jul 13 2009, 07:28 PM, said:

Agree with Pass and then 4♠.

I do not understand making a free bid on this hand over 1♥.  But I see this all the time in these Fora.

But seriously; the key to understand 1♠, is to consider how unlikely it is to get hurt, and how likely it is to gain a profit.
If partner has a balanced hand, you will seldom get into trouble (Unless partner partner can be 15-17 bal. in which case you need some agreements to slow him down), and if partner has an unbalanced hand with 5+ clubs, your playing strength surely warrants competing, often even to the 3-level.

You are oversimplyfing.

I agree.

Quote

I do not want to compare the pros and cons of the new and the ancient approach...

Neither did I.

The point I wanted to put forward (I didn't succeed), was that 1♠ is odds-on, when you consider it a little, assuming your partner doesn't hang you.

[cherdanno]

gnasher, on Jul 14 2009, 07:31 AM, said:

Quote

(If we play 3♣ over 2N as non-forcing, I don't even see the problem.)

In how many partnership do you play 3♣ as non-forcing?

I haven't discussed this auction with anyone (since it can't occur in what I play with Han). But I do think it is better to play it as non-forcing, and would even guess that's the natural assumption without discussion - when there is a cuebid, there is less need for other bids to be artificial or forcing.