[eyhung]

jjbrr, on Feb 11 2010, 10:38 PM, said:

Why would I be joking? Why do you waste everyone's time sitting there thinking about bids that haven't happened yet? I'm also a very fast player fwiw. And I've played enough hands that I know what the rebids are lol. That argument is a little ridiculous.

You really sit there and think "Well if the auction goes 1♣ (1♥) dbl I have an opening hand! But if it goes 1♣ (2♠) then I don't!"

I wasn't talking about considering a complete set of rebids or a competitive auction. I was talking about common problem rebids in a constructive auction, like anticipating what to do when opening a 1345 11-count, or a 1156 10-count, or even a 2344 19-count (now the question is which minor). I've gotten good enough that I can streamline the process into identifying difficult rebids quickly, but it would be wrong for me to say "I don't consider rebids when deciding whether or not to open and I think it's good practice". If you aren't considering your rebid for partner's simple non-jump response, I think you may have room to improve your opening algorithm.

And FWIW I think I can be too fast at times, so anything that can help me even out my tempo is a good thing.

[jjbrr]

eyhung, on Feb 12 2010, 01:00 PM, said:

jjbrr, on Feb 11 2010, 10:38 PM, said:

Why would I be joking? Why do you waste everyone's time sitting there thinking about bids that haven't happened yet? I'm also a very fast player fwiw. And I've played enough hands that I know what the rebids are lol. That argument is a little ridiculous.

You really sit there and think "Well if the auction goes 1♣ (1♥) dbl I have an opening hand! But if it goes 1♣ (2♠) then I don't!"

I wasn't talking about considering a complete set of rebids or a competitive auction. I was talking about common problem rebids in a constructive auction, like anticipating what to do when opening a 1345 11-count, or a 1156 10-count, or even a 2344 19-count (now the question is which minor). I've gotten good enough that I can streamline the process into identifying difficult rebids quickly, but it would be wrong for me to say "I don't consider rebids when deciding whether or not to open and I think it's good practice". If you aren't considering your rebid for partner's simple non-jump response, I think you may have room to improve your opening algorithm.

And FWIW I think I can be too fast at times, so anything that can help me even out my tempo is a good thing.

OK. This is sort of a silly discussion (and has been for a while, admittedly). My point is I've played enough hands that I know all the common rebids. I interpreted the problem as something along the lines of "I would open a 12 count with 1354 but not with 1345 because partner will bid 1♠ and I won't know what to do!"

To me, this is ridiculous.

As an aside, I prefer a precision system, and both the example patterns and strengths you provided are clear openers to me, regardless of what the hands are. (Looks like you ninja added 2344 19 count, again not a problem.) So that point is moot.

[PhantomSac]

Seems like eugene is saying that he considers rebids when opening, and jeremy is saying he doesn't simply because he has played enough to know what he will rebid on the common hands within a few seconds, which eugene agrees with.

The only disagreement seems to be whether or not the fact that you have a bad rebid in a common situation should dissuade you from opening. I think Jeremy is saying that that will never cause him to not open, whereas eyhung is saying on borderline hands it may cause him to not open.

I guess I kinda agree with them both, it's not really much of a consideration, but on the very borderline hands I would pass if I have some "bad" rebids, and open with "good rebids." For instance I might open with a 5422 that I would pass on 4522 on a very marginal hand (not playing flannery), or pass a 1453 and open a 1354 very marginal hand. Overall though it would be very rare that this would be the deciding factor for me.

[straube]

I was taught that strong jump shifts (Soloway jump shifts) are most useful on hands of maybe 5 losers in which you want partner (with a minimum hand) to be empowered to cooperate in bidding a slam. For instance, with a similar pattern, one might jump to 2D and then rebid 3C. With a stronger hand, one can't expect partner to do a whole lot and sometimes you can find other ways of handling things. With this particular hand, why not just ask for aces right away? 1C-4N? Or 1C-4D if that's your asking bid. You get to find out about the club king and queen and more particularly what you really want...the SA. Then you can ask for kings. I think you have 14 tricks here and you only need 13.