[kgr]

If you play T-Walsh then what do you prefer to open with 4=4 minors, 1♦ or 1♣?
If 12-14

---

or 18-19

---

[mattias]

I think this depends on what completing the transfer shows. If completing shows the small balanced hand and 1NT shows 18-19, then you want to open 1♣ with all 18-19 hands to free up the 2NT rebid after a 1♦ opening. From there the step is not long to also open 1♣ on all balanced 12-14 hands, and also freeing up the 1NT rebid after 1♦.

[paulg]

I put all balanced hands into the 1♣ opener. This increases the use of T-Walsh, which I think is an improvement over standard, and means that my 1♦ opener is unbalanced.

Some others will split the notrump ranges between 1m bids. So that 1♣ is opened on all 12-14 balanced hands and 1♦ on all 18-19 balanced. This reduces the use of T-Walsh but can help in competition.

[fromageGB]

I'm in the camp of opening all such balanced hands 1♣ regardless of being stronger or weaker, and regardless of minor length (eg even with 3253 shape). The benefits of the continuations make is easy to happily not show the lengths. The concomitant advantages of playing an unbalanced 1♦ and the inferences that gives in the bidding is a hidden benefit.

Our method of coping with 4th seat interference is that (barring support for responder) a pass by opener shows the weaker range, whereas a bid other than 2♣ shows the stronger range.

[mgoetze]

paulg, on 2013-August-21, 09:57, said:

I put all balanced hands into the 1♣ opener. This increases the use of T-Walsh, which I think is an improvement over standard, and means that my 1♦ opener is unbalanced.

Same here.

[kgr]

mattias, on 2013-August-21, 09:38, said:

I think this depends on what completing the transfer shows. If completing shows the small balanced hand and 1NT shows 18-19, then you want to open 1♣ with all 18-19 hands to free up the 2NT rebid after a 1♦ opening. From there the step is not long to also open 1♣ on all balanced 12-14 hands, and also freeing up the 1NT rebid after 1♦.

Completing the transfer shows exactly a 3-card, unlimited, for us.

[kgr]

My question comes from a discussion with my partner.

We agree that opening 1♦ is better with the weak hand:
e.g with:
xx=Qxx=AJxx=KQxx
1♣-(1♠)-DBL-(Pass)
versus
1♦-(1♠)-DBL-(Pass)
=> To my surprise this agreement is not in line with forum posters above.

We disagree about the strong hands. My partner also prefers to open 1♦ with the 18-19 hand, but with that strength I prefer to open 1♣, as I don't see the need to open 1♦.

[yunling]

Take a look at this thread
http://www.bridgebas...s-your-1d-open/

So far as I know, Polish players will just bid 1NT(or even 2NT!) with 12-14bal and small doubleton in opp's suit, though it is a bit different here.

[fromageGB]

kgr, on 2013-August-21, 10:47, said:

My question comes from a discussion with my partner.

We agree that opening 1♦ is better with the weak hand:
e.g with:
xx=Qxx=AJxx=KQxx
1♣-(1♠)-DBL-(Pass)
versus
1♦-(1♠)-DBL-(Pass)
=> To my surprise this agreement is not in line with forum posters above.

We disagree about the strong hands. My partner also prefers to open 1♦ with the 18-19 hand, but with that strength I prefer to open 1♣, as I don't see the need to open 1♦.

With regard to the disagreement that needs resolution, I am sure most here will agree with you, as the strong hand will usually have a good continuation. What that is depends on your use of the simple completion, NT rebids, etc.

What I would suggest is that you both think about using 1♣ with all balanced 12-14 hands. Are you opening 1♦ on a 2344 shape just in case LHO bids a spade? What do you do when opponents pass and partner has hearts? You seem to have lost the ability for him to show the length and the strength. Say a 9 count 5 card suit that leaves you probably struggling to find the right contract?

For your problem hand where it goes 1♣ (1♠) X (p) then it obviously depends on your agreement of what partner's bids mean in this circumstance. If he is showing exactly 4 hearts, then I would be happy to rebid 1NT. Not having a stop in their suit is not a disaster at the 1-level and it may be the best contract, and you have not distorted your shown shape, as you would on your alternative bidding. If the X is 4 or 5 hearts less than invitational then I would rebid 2♥ on a 3 card suit. Partner is aware that this may be 3, so will not normally continue if he has 4. (We have other bids for invitational+ hands.)

[kgr]

Thank you!

fromageGB, on 2013-August-22, 05:34, said:

For your problem hand where it goes 1♣ (1♠) X (p) then it obviously depends on your agreement of what partner's bids mean in this circumstance. If he is showing exactly 4 hearts, then I would be happy to rebid 1NT. Not having a stop in their suit is not a disaster at the 1-level and it may be the best contract, and you have not distorted your shown shape, as you would on your alternative bidding. If the X is 4 or 5 hearts less than invitational then I would rebid 2♥ on a 3 card suit. Partner is aware that this may be 3, so will not normally continue if he has 4. (We have other bids for invitational+ hands.)

DBL shows exactly 4c♥, with longer ♥ we bid 2♦.
It can also go 1♣-(2♠)-DBL-(Pass) (DBL also showing a 4c♥)

[kgr]

yunling, on 2013-August-21, 18:46, said:

Take a look at this thread
http://www.bridgebas...s-your-1d-open/

So far as I know, Polish players will just bid 1NT(or even 2NT!) with 12-14bal and small doubleton in opp's suit, though it is a bit different here.

Thanks. good searching

[fromageGB]

kgr, on 2013-August-22, 08:53, said:

Thank you!
DBL shows exactly 4c♥, with longer ♥ we bid 2♦.
It can also go 1♣-(2♠)-DBL-(Pass) (DBL also showing a 4c♥)

In that case you have no problem opening 1♣ on weak hands. In the first case you rebid 1NT as discussed, and over (2♠) X presumably he would not make that X unless strong enough for a 2NT from you. It is therefore invitational strength, so if you have a 14 with good spades you can bid 3NT.

I see that over (1♠) you are distinguishing heart lengths. That certainly has benefits, because you can't show everything over "high" interference. However, with 2♦ to show 5 cards, you are not distinguishing between strengths, so presumably with invitational strength he will raise support to 3♥, but is stuck if you rebid 2NT. The approach I have taken with one partner is to make compromises in the other direction. We show the invitational strength (and whether 4 or 5 card) but we cannot distinguish between 4 and 5 card when weak.

[SteelWheel]

There are two big club-weak notrump systems which have fascinated me for years: Varvel's "An Unassuming Club", and Poe's "Millennium Club". Varvel's is not a transfer response type system (although it could easily be modified to be one); he suggests opening 1♦ whenever opener has "real" (4+) diamonds. Poe's system (very definitely a transfer-response system vs any big club open) suggests opening a 12-"bad 15" 1NT on any balanced or semi-balanced shape--this includes not only (3-2) 5=3, but in fact any 5332, including hands with a 5-card major, provided they are in that 12-14.5 range.

Anyone out there playing one of these (or something similar)?