[helene_t]

KJxx
-
AJxx
KJxxx

IMPs, w/w.

Partner opens 1♦. Your plan? 1♦ is 4+ and we play WJS, otherwise similar to the GIB system We play NMF. Inverted minors denies a 4cM, in principle.

I bid 1♠. After p's 1NT rebid I bid 2♣ to establish a force (p replied 2♠ which probably denies four hearts). Now 3♦, p 3NT.

If p really denied four hearts then the silent opps have a 10-card hearts fit. So I thought partner was likely to have something like AQJ in hearts. I passed. 3NT required finding the ♣Q while 5♦ was much safer.

Maybe bad judgment on my part. I suppose I shouldn't necessarily trust opps to bid at w/w just because they have ten good hearts (only missing the ace). But judgment issues aside, the hand made me think about the system. Partner's 3NT bid shows stoppers in clubs and hearts, but she has no way of knowing that what she actually needs is double stoppers in hearts. I would bid the same way with KQx/xx in the rounded suits. I suppose she could have bid 3♥ with good hearts stoppers but nothing in clubs. Still, it feels wrong that I now have to decide whether to pass 3NT or not, without having shown partner the discrepancy between my holdings in the rounded suits.

What is a good solution to this? Is it necessary to allow inverted minors with a 4-card major? And will it really solve this problem?

[Cyberyeti]

You could just bid 3♥ splinter, if partner bids 3N then they have the heart holding like AQJ that you fear.

You're a bit stuffed by the fact that your system removes the easy ways of handling this hand type, I can inverted minor this (or I could SJS if the clubs were a tad batter like KJ10).

Why 1♠ rather than 2♣ (F1/FG?) ?

[helene_t]

2♣ would be a GF but I am not sure if we can find a spade fit if it starts
1♦-2♣
2NT-3♦
I suppose partner could show a 4-card major after this but I think 3M now should just show a concentration of values. Basically, it feels wrong to me to start with 3♣ when clubs is the only denomination (other than hearts) which I am not interested in.

Yes I considered a splinter but I didn't want to give up on spades. In retrospect I thought I should just have decided to give up on spades, or, alternatively, to give up on notrumps.

[Cyberyeti]

helene_t, on 2013-April-08, 05:19, said:

2♣ would be a GF but I am not sure if we can find a spade fit if it starts
1♦-2♣
2NT-3♦
I suppose partner could show a 4-card major after this but I think 3M now should just show a concentration of values. Basically, it feels wrong to me to start with 3♣ when clubs is the only denomination (other than hearts) which I am not interested in.

Yes I considered a splinter but I didn't want to give up on spades. In retrospect I thought I should just have decided to give up on spades, or, alternatively, to give up on notrumps.

If partner is going to bypass 2♠ and bid 2N with a weak no trump then yes you have this issue (I have no familiarity with strong NT 2/1)

[rhm]

helene_t, on 2013-April-08, 04:59, said:

KJxx
-
AJxx
KJxxx

IMPs, w/w.

Partner opens 1♦. Your plan? 1♦ is 4+ and we play WJS, otherwise similar to the GIB system We play NMF. Inverted minors denies a 4cM, in principle.

I bid 1♠. After p's 1NT rebid I bid 2♣ to establish a force (p replied 2♠ which probably denies four hearts). Now 3♦, p 3NT.

I would not respond 1♠
As the bidding went at your second turn I would bid 3♣ not 3♦, over which partner has more alternatives not to bid 3NT when he has hearts not covered well. He can bid 3♦, 3♥, 3♠ all of which would show doubts about hearts. Last but not least he might raise clubs. Bingo!

helene_t, on 2013-April-08, 05:19, said:

2♣ would be a GF but I am not sure if we can find a spade fit if it starts
1♦-2♣
2NT-3♦
I suppose partner could show a 4-card major after this but I think 3M now should just show a concentration of values. Basically, it feels wrong to me to start with 3♣ when clubs is the only denomination (other than hearts) which I am not interested in.

I do not understand this.
The fact that I will correct a club strain to diamonds does not mean I am not interested.
Clubs is my longest suit and it is a broken suit. I am very much interested that partner values his hand according to club honors he might have or not.
Assume we have a double fit in the minors. Would that not be nice?
Over 2NT I would bid 3♠ (not 3♦) making clear that I have a strong hand and are worried about hearts
If 2NT does not deny a 4 card major all the more reason to bid 3♠ instead of 3♦.

Rainer Herrmann

[Trinidad]

helene_t, on 2013-April-08, 05:19, said:

2♣ would be a GF but I am not sure if we can find a spade fit if it starts
1♦-2♣
2NT-3♦
I suppose partner could show a 4-card major after this but I think 3M now should just show a concentration of values. Basically, it feels wrong to me to start with 3♣ when clubs is the only denomination (other than hearts) which I am not interested in.

Yes I considered a splinter but I didn't want to give up on spades. In retrospect I thought I should just have decided to give up on spades, or, alternatively, to give up on notrumps.

I would respond 2♣. If the auction then continues:
1♦-2♣
2NT-

I will not bid 3♦, I will bid 3♠ and I will have shown a GF hand with 5+ clubs and 4 spades. This way, I will not miss a spade fit.

My first real decision comes when partner is still not supporting one of my suits (as usual):
1♦-2♣
2NT-3♠
3NT-

At IMPs, I would now bid 4♦ and hope that partner doesn't hold ♥KQJ. This should show a GF 4045 hand.

Rik

[HeartA]

I agree with Rik, bidding 2♣ first and then 2♠ if possible. If, after I showed 2 black suits, she still wants to play 3NT, I would let it go.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

1D - 2C! ( 2/1 GF, does NOT deny a 4 card Major )
??
.. First obligation is to rebid 2D with 5+♦ suit; does not deny a 4 card Major; you now have the entire 2-level to find a 4-4 major fit if one exists.
.. 2NT would DENY a 4 card Major as well as deny 5 cards ♦.
.. 2M would show a 4 card Major and deny 5 cards ♦ .

[HeartA]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-April-08, 12:15, said:

1D - 2C! ( 2/1 GF, does NOT deny a 4 card Major )
??
.. First obligation is to rebid 2D with 5+♦ suit; does not deny a 4 card Major; you now have the entire 2-level to find a 4-4 major fit if one exists.
.. 2NT would DENY a 4 card Major as well as deny 5 cards ♦.
.. 2M would show a 4 card Major and deny 5 cards ♦ .

This is certainly good sequence.

[Vampyr]

What is wrong with some form of checkback?

[aguahombre]

In old fuddy dud Walsh, 1D-2C elicits specific responses due to the fact that in addition to G.F., it is a suit of 5+. The 2-level rebids by opener are:

2D-5+, denying 3 clubs.
2H-4 of them, denying 3 clubs, or 5+diamonds.
2S-4 of them, same denial as above.
2N-exactly 4=4=3=2, 12-14 or 18-19. (Strong NT splits the range)

3C-any 3 card support..sometimes 4
3D-Solid suit 6+, not showing extras.
3M-splinter with 4C...no extras.
3N-specifically 3-3-5-2 18-19 pts.

So, with this responding hand, we can start with 2C with an eye toward bidding around the heart void, but breaking off that if we discover a spade fit ---and keeping a minor-suit slam in play. If Pard rebids 2H, we can think about ending in 3NT, but not just yet.

[fromageGB]

I am not sure 2♣ is the answer, if this shows a 5 card suit. After all, it is the same system problem if responder is 4144 shape.

If it starts 1♦ 1♠ 1NT 2♣, is this simply nmf/checkback without actually showing a club suit? If it is, then after 2♠ you can rebid 3♣ to show genuine clubs. This allows partner to bid 3♦ with 5, 3♥ needing help for NT, 3♠ meaning a lot of help in hearts is needed, 3NT meaning happy with hearts. Does that do it? If so, you can keep to inverted minors denying a 4 card major.

[gwnn]

In what system does 2C show a 5-card suit?

[Zelandakh]

gwnn, on 2013-April-09, 06:23, said:

In what system does 2C show a 5-card suit?

It does in mine, not that that is very relevant. I assume agua means that "fuddy dud Walsh" is where you bid the major before the minor irrespective of strength and either respond in NT or raise diamonds with no major and fewer than 5 clubs.

[gwnn]

And with 18+ with 3334 I assume you pass? OK you can play 2NT as 16+ balanced I guess. Still 2♣ as 5+ is I think quite rare.

[Zelandakh]

gwnn, on 2013-April-09, 06:59, said:

And with 18+ with 3334 I assume you pass? OK you can play 2NT as 16+ balanced I guess. Still 2♣ as 5+ is I think quite rare.

With 16+ balanced and playing "fuddy dud" bridge, you respond 4♣ obviously - Gerber.

[aguahombre]

Zelandakh, on 2013-April-09, 06:50, said:

It does in mine, not that that is very relevant. I assume agua means that "fuddy dud Walsh" is where you bid the major before the minor irrespective of strength and either respond in NT or raise diamonds with no major and fewer than 5 clubs.

Yes, you are correct. The antequated concept of 1D-2C was (is for us) that strain/shape was important in 2/1 auctions, 2c showed club length, and that first priority was to show support for clubs. Sometimes opener could actually show both shape and strength right away leaving responder in total charge. Sometimes opener had to wait until responder was finished and then break out himself.

As, for the 3-3-3-4 responding hand with 16+: you picked up on the one exception to 2C showing 5+. But, when responder bids 2C and opener rebids per the scheme, things work out ok.

One of the things helpful if opener has made a simple 3C raise is that for instance 4N is not ace-asking in an allegedly minor-suit auction.

This post has been edited by aguahombre: 2013-April-09, 09:57

[mike777]

I will start with 3h.

[aguahombre]

mike777, on 2013-April-09, 10:05, said:

I will start with 3h.

You are not the only one. But it sure preempts our auction while not being specific about black suit or Diamond length, nor whether we have a stiff heart or void.

It comes at a cost, as well ---the use of 3H to show a 7-bagger likely to have two losers in the suit opposite a stiff X with nothing outside. (AQ or KQJ would be too strong).

[mike777]

aguahombre, on 2013-April-09, 10:16, said:

You are not the only one. But it sure preempts our auction while not being specific about black suit or Diamond length, nor whether we have a stiff heart or void.

It comes at a cost, as well ---the use of 3H to show a 7-bagger likely to have two losers in the suit opposite a stiff X with nothing outside. (AQ or KQJ would be too strong).

all good points. IT does at least limit my hand.....short h, long d... roughly 6 loser hand.