[pescetom]

Alas I was Director here.

MP

---

Your call here?

For me not quite 2NT (give me spades T instead of 6) in my rogue partnership, an automatic 1♣ elsewhere.

[mw64ahw]

Fairly straightforward in either of the TW versions I play. After 1♣
1♦ tfr - 2♠ 43s5
1♥ tfr - 3♦ 43s5

[Cyberyeti]

1♣ no second choice

[jillybean]

1♣ or are you crazy?
Long tank before pulling 1C card could suggest many things, no problem yet.

[P_Marlowe]

1C

2NT would only be an option, if playing 19-?, playing 20-?
2NT is no option, you only have 18HCP, your 5 card suit is
nothing worth to meantion, and the shape is also not very bal.

1C, you dont have a rebid issue, you always can make a 2S
GF bid, showing 54.

[paulg]

If I saw an intermediate or advanced player open anything other than 1♣, then they deserve a good thrashing. I would not give their partner a penalty for doing this afterwards.

For example: https://youtu.be/78b67l_yxUc

This post has been edited by paulg: 2026-October-02, 02:17

[pescetom]

 jillybean, on 2026-October-01, 19:23, said:

Long tank before pulling 1C card could suggest many things, no problem yet.

Yesterday I encountered a creative pair in a BBO tournament with the irksome regulation "obligatory to concede Undo in bidding phase": 1C Undo 1NT just happened to be 15 balanced, cheerfully passed by partner.

[pescetom]

Playing natural (or Transfer Walsh, I imagine):

MP

---

Playing Walsh:

MP

---

Your call now?

[Cyberyeti]

I don't play walsh, would bid 1♠, for us this is "forcing if you have a real response" 4♠/5♣ 4414 would have opened 1♦.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I bid spades in a forcing manner, i.e. either 1S or 2S, I plan to follow up with
bidding hearts to show my distribution.

In my reg. p, I would need to bid 2S for various reasons.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mike777]

pescetom, on 2026-October-02, 06:27, said:

Playing natural (or Transfer Walsh, I imagine):

MP

---

Playing Walsh:

MP

---

Your call now?

two spades in both examples, one spade would certainly not be forcing, Playing Transfers over one club I could understand a 1NT rebid choice (17/18-19, balanced).

[mikeh]

1S. Tte suits are wring and the honour location wrong for 2S imo. In and out valuation suggests that this is not a strong 18 count. 8 hcp in my long suits, 10 in my short suits.

And for me, 1S is not forcing. If partner passes I doubt we have missed a good game.

[pescetom]

 mikeh, on 2026-October-02, 07:41, said:

1S. Tte suits are wring and the honour location wrong for 2S imo. In and out valuation suggests that this is not a strong 18 count. 8 hcp in my long suits, 10 in my short suits.

And for me, 1S is not forcing. If partner passes I doubt we have missed a good game.

Interesting, one of our old school and most experienced players did the same.

I would have no qualms about taking the non forcing low road if I shared your evaluation of the hand strength, but I can't bring myself to do that although I may well be wrong. It looks fine to me for a jump shift [reverse deleted], even in possible partial hearts misfit.

I would bid 2S and let the system take its course.

[P_Marlowe]

pescetom, on 2026-October-02, 09:10, said:

Interesting, one of our old school and most experienced players did the same.

I would have no qualms about taking the non forcing low road if I shared your evaluation of the hand strength, but I can't bring myself to do that although I may well be wrong. It looks fine to me for a reverse, even in possible partial hearts misfit.

I would bid 2S and let the system take its course.

It is certainly not a terrific 18 count, ..., I guess playing MP may even be odds o going the low road, but I dont think,
I can see myself bidding only 1S.

[mikeh]

pescetom, on 2026-October-02, 09:10, said:

Interesting, one of our old school and most experienced players did the same.

I would have no qualms about taking the non forcing low road if I shared your evaluation of the hand strength, but I can't bring myself to do that although I may well be wrong. It looks fine to me for a reverse, even in possible partial hearts misfit.

I would bid 2S and let the system take its course.

2S is not a reverse. While there is some overlap between the hand strength required for a reverse and that for a jumpshift, reverses have a lower minimum and do not, for the vast majotiyof players create a gf

[pescetom]

 mikeh, on 2026-October-02, 09:38, said:

2S is not a reverse. While there is some overlap between the hand strength required for a reverse and that for a jumpshift, reverses have a lower minimum and do not, for the vast majotiyof players create a gf

Sure, I was just thinking in Italian where a jump shift is inappropriately termed reverse.

[DavidKok]

1♣ into 1♠. I do not consider this close. If partner decides to rebid 2♠ with this hand we will discuss after the game, they've misunderstood something that might come up again. I've had the misfortune of playing with people who insist that the 1♠ rebid is limited to about 17 or a good 16, and stronger should jump. Even in Dutch Doubleton, where 1♥ promises 8(+) or so hcp (but we're allowed to upgrade into it), jump bidding 2♠ is a waste of space and system. The unfortunate news is that these 'up to 17' players might hang us with a 7-count, but one board is a small price to pay for such a valuable teaching moment.

[mikeh]

pescetom, on 2026-October-02, 09:55, said:

Sure, I was just thinking in Italian where a jump shift is inappropriately termed reverse.

I tried thinking in Italian as well. But I didn’t understand what I was thinking😀

[bluenikki]

DavidKok, on 2026-October-02, 10:13, said:

The unfortunate news is that these 'up to 17' players might hang us with a 7-count, but one board is a small price to pay for such a valuable teaching moment.

Which 7-count? Not an ace and a king, I hope.

That's the crucial question. Which 7s will responder strain not to pass?

[DavidKok]

bluenikki, on 2026-October-02, 20:02, said:

Which 7-count? Not an ace and a king, I hope.

That's the crucial question. Which 7s will responder strain not to pass?

I would expect responder to bid again with even a lousy 6-count and a good chunk of 5-counts. To me the talk of 'which 7-count' is a distraction - I expect responder to bid again (in particular, 2♣) with ♠xxx, ♥KQxxx, ♦xx, ♣xxx.
My main point I am trying to convey is that 1♠ is, while NF, not excluding most 18- and 19-counts. I do not want partner to pass it with a normal 6-count. The logic is not complicated: if your hand is decent for spades, don't leave me at the 1-level. If your hand is not decent for spades, take me out of them. There is so much room left to find out best contract, and 1♠ is almost never that contract. I would only consider passing if I had a hand which met all the following criteria:

• Weaker than any normal response, meaning typically a 4-count or some soft 5-counts (note: coincidentally, Dutch Doubleton excludes these from the 1♥ response - but I'm writing this from the position of a standard system).
  
• Exactly 3 spades (with 4, raise. With 2 or fewer, take me to a better strain).
  
• At most 2 clubs (otherwise pull to 2♣).

Note that I play 1m-2♥ shows 4-8, and since my 1♠ rebid is unbalanced responder can pull to 2♣ with only 3 cards, so the only problem hands are 2=5=4=2 and those of the 5-5 reds type.