[dosxtres]

You hold ♠4 ♥QJt98 ♦6 ♣AJtxxx

Parnerd open

1♦ pass 1♥ pass
1♠ pass ??

1n?
2!c (tha is is Game forcing, right?
3!c? Invitational 55 non forcing?
any?

[skjaeran]

There's several schools here.

Playing FSF, I play 2♣ GF, but another school play it as inv+.

You can play 3♣ in several fashions:
NAT inv, showing 55+
Nat GF, showing 55+
I've played it as a miniplinter, showing a singleton, 4c♠ inv.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

whatever you agreed on, but I would
if it is natural, than game forcing makes
the most sense, why else jump wild around
in a situation which screams misfit.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: 4th suit 2C can either be inv.+ or game
forcing, I prefer inv.+, but in America game
forcing is more common.

[mike777]

dosxtres, on Apr 15 2007, 10:26 AM, said:

You hold ♠4  ♥QJt98 ♦6 ♣AJtxxx

Parnerd open

1♦  pass 1♥ pass
1♠   pass  ??

1n?
2!c (tha is is Game forcing, right?
3!c? Invitational 33 non forcing?
any?

I would just rebid 2H.

2c or 3c are game forcing, I am not going to invent a system in the middle of the hand. 1nt may not be best.

1) If we have a perfect agreed system bid, we should bid it and this hand is not a problem.
2) If we do not have a perfect system rebid, let us see what a 2h rebid shows
2a: minimum hand, check
2b: nonforcing, check
2c: does not promise spades or diamonds, check
2d: unbalanced hand, check
2e: 5+ hearts, check.

[kenberg]

mike777, on Apr 15 2007, 01:35 PM, said:

dosxtres, on Apr 15 2007, 10:26 AM, said:

You hold ♠4  ♥QJt98 ♦6 ♣AJtxxx

Parnerd open

1♦  pass 1♥ pass
1♠  pass  ??

1n?
2!c (tha is is Game forcing, right?
3!c? Invitational 33 non forcing?
any?

I would just rebid 2H.

2c or 3c are game forcing, I am not going to invent a system in the middle of the hand. 1nt may not be best.

1) If we have a perfect agreed system bid, we should bid it and this hand is not a problem.
2) If we do not have a perfect system rebid, let us see what a 2h rebid shows
2a: minimum hand, check
2b: nonforcing, check
2c: does not promise spades or diamonds, check
2d: unbalanced hand, check
2e: 5+ hearts, check.

This all makes sense to me. The Golden Rule (Thou shalt not rebid an unsupported suit unless you have 6) goes back to whom? To Kaplan maybe? Whoever it was, I don't see it as an absolute. Most likely 2H will be passed out, and most likely it will be the best spot that you can intelligently get to.

[P_Marlowe]

dosxtres, on Apr 15 2007, 10:26 AM, said:

You hold ♠4 ♥QJt98 ♦6 ♣AJtxxx

Parnerd open

1♦ pass 1♥ pass
1♠ pass ??

1n?

To answer your question, 1NT.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: 2H will get you very quickly to 4H
in case you play weak jump shifts.

[blackshoe]

One of the things that marks the transition from beginner/intermediate to advanced is the realization that all these rules we were given as if they were engraved in stone ...aren't.

[mike777]

If you are going to play a 2/1, Walsh style, when responder has a major suit and a longer minor and a weakish or invite hand this kind of problem is common. There are 3 basic solutions:

1) Live with it and bid something sane. You knew this going in when you agreed to Walsh.
2) Add a bunch of complicated conventions and hope you and pard remember them
3) Do not play 2/1-Walsh.

[pclayton]

Rebid 1N. On a real good day, pard bids out his shape with 2♣.

I play 3♣ as an invitational 5-5, unless I'm playing 2 way NMF where its GF.

[the hog]

1NT. Best option. Not 2H as the suit isn't good enough. Second choice, but a LONG way behind, is believe it or not, 2D. Opener has shown at least a 5-4.

Mike, what does Walsh have to do with this hand? You will bid 1H playing any system.

[mike777]

The_Hog, on Apr 15 2007, 05:55 PM, said:

1NT. Best option. Not 2H as the suit isn't good enough. Second choice, but a LONG way behind, is believe it or not, 2D. Opener has shown at least a 5-4.

Mike, what does Walsh have to do with this hand? You will bid 1H playing any system.

really any common system? ok.

But this still does not look like a 1nt rebid by me..I will live with 2h.

[whereagles]

Textbook 1NT, although you might get away with 2♥. Anything else is just too optimistic.

[DWM]

Why not 2♦ for suit preference rather than 1NT?

I know it is unlikley that it is the best contract, but at least it is at a low level. I thought that heading for NT when there is a misfit is a bad idea.

[skjaeran]

The_Hog, on Apr 16 2007, 12:55 AM, said:

1NT. Best option. Not 2H as the suit isn't good enough. Second choice, but a LONG way behind, is believe it or not, 2D. Opener has shown at least a 5-4.

Mike, what does Walsh have to do with this hand? You will bid 1H playing any system.

5-4 using standard methods?
4-4 I'd say. It's by far not standard to bypass 1♠ here to show 12-14 balanced. And surely not for B/I players.

There's two possible bids now IMO; 1NT and 2♥. Playing wjs, 2♥ is not an alternative, since that should show a 6-bagger too strong for a wjs. Partner would put me in 4♥ too often.

With a side entry, I'd rate my chances in 1NT to be fine, so I'll rebid 1NT. Besides, partner might come back wiht 2♣ or 2♥, and my hand would grow immensely in value.

[inquiry]

Forgetting about the actual hand held...

If 2♣ is played as 100% game force, then a jump to 3♣ should be clubs and not forcing. It can be invitational or long clubs and weak, which ever you prefer.

If 2♣ is one round force, then a jump to 3♣ should be clubs and GF.

If you play xyz, so that 2♣ followed by 3♣ would be invitational, and 2♦ followed by 3♣ would be forcing, then a jump to 3♣ should be weak and long clubs.

[skjaeran]

inquiry, on Apr 16 2007, 03:45 PM, said:

Forgetting about the actual hand held...

If you play xyz, so that 2♣ followed by 3♣ would be invitational, and 2♦ followed by 3♣ would be forcing, then a jump to 3♣ should be weak and long clubs.

100% agree.

I've seen several posts here in the forums saying that 3♣ would be forcing playing xyz. I've played xy and xyz for several years, and always played 3♣ as weak with long suit. Some seem to use 2NT as a transfer to ♣'s. That might work well, but I've not tried it myself.

The standard meaning of 2♣ (puppet to 2♦) followed by 2NT here is inv with support for the opening suit, whereas a direct 2NT is just natural inv. This distinction disappers if you play 2NT as a transfer.

[the hog]

skaeran, on Apr 16 2007, 08:37 PM, said:

The_Hog, on Apr 16 2007, 12:55 AM, said:

1NT. Best option. Not 2H as the suit isn't good enough. Second choice, but a LONG way behind, is believe it or not, 2D. Opener has shown at least a 5-4.

Mike, what does Walsh have to do with this hand? You will bid 1H playing any system.

5-4 using standard methods?
4-4 I'd say. It's by far not standard to bypass 1♠ here to show 12-14 balanced. And surely not for B/I players.

There's two possible bids now IMO; 1NT and 2♥. Playing wjs, 2♥ is not an alternative, since that should show a 6-bagger too strong for a wjs. Partner would put me in 4♥ too often.

With a side entry, I'd rate my chances in 1NT to be fine, so I'll rebid 1NT. Besides, partner might come back wiht 2♣ or 2♥, and my hand would grow immensely in value.

Skaeran we have been through this many times. You will find that most of the players - certainly those who bid well - will treat a balanced hand like a balanced hand and rebid 1N on some 4432 without bidding every suit under the sun.

[whereagles]

I used to bid

1♣ 1♥
1♠

even on a 4333 shape. While this avoids missing the 44 spade fit if responder has 44 majors and 6-10, it delays showing shape and strength.

For this reason I started to skip the spades and go right into showing shape and strength with 1NT. I haven't regret it so far...

[SoTired]

I rebid 2H. I think that if you rebid and play in 1N, you will not like the play. You will get stuck in the hand with the most losers leading away from honors. Likely, you will end up pitching winning rounded suit cards on losing pointy suit cards or visa-versa. Very, very aggravating. The worst hand partner could have - 4153 - may still not do better in 1NT than 2H.

[skjaeran]

The_Hog, on Apr 17 2007, 12:41 AM, said:

skaeran, on Apr 16 2007, 08:37 PM, said:

The_Hog, on Apr 16 2007, 12:55 AM, said:

1NT. Best option. Not 2H as the suit isn't good enough. Second choice, but a LONG way behind, is believe it or not, 2D. Opener has shown at least a 5-4.

Mike, what does Walsh have to do with this hand? You will bid 1H playing any system.

5-4 using standard methods?
4-4 I'd say. It's by far not standard to bypass 1♠ here to show 12-14 balanced. And surely not for B/I players.

There's two possible bids now IMO; 1NT and 2♥. Playing wjs, 2♥ is not an alternative, since that should show a 6-bagger too strong for a wjs. Partner would put me in 4♥ too often.

With a side entry, I'd rate my chances in 1NT to be fine, so I'll rebid 1NT. Besides, partner might come back wiht 2♣ or 2♥, and my hand would grow immensely in value.

Skaeran we have been through this many times. You will find that most of the players - certainly those who bid well - will treat a balanced hand like a balanced hand and rebid 1N on some 4432 without bidding every suit under the sun.

I very much doubt that I'll find that most of the players will bypass a 4c spade suit here playing a strong NT (15-17 or something like that). You'll far too often miss your best spot. I'm talking about over a 1♦ opening now, not 1♣, where most strong players play Walsh or T-Walsh.

Playing a weak NT, I agree. Most would bypass 1♠ with a balanced hand, and rebid 1NT to show 15-17.

Your statement might be true where you play. But I can tell you that at least 90% (probably more) of norwegian top players would rebid 1♠.