[FelicityR]

I was watching Vugraph and this hand turned up or thereabouts

---

If partner opened 1♥ in first or second position, playing the 2/1 system, without the opponents intervening, and without your partner using Flannery as an opener, or without you playing Bergen as a responder, what do you feel is the best bid for this hand?

1♠; 1NT (forcing or semi-forcing); or 3♦ (weak not Soloway jump shift)

And how would you justify your bidding after opener rebids?

(Btw I watched quite an amazing (in my opinion) bidding sequence where responder bid 1♠ and opener passed!!! [Surely responder could be unlimited here...]

[pescetom]

I bid 1♠ which for me is the systemic bid.
Partner cannot pass.
Whatever happens later will happen.
If partner rebids 1NT I have useful conventional bids available.

[Stephen Tu]

I think not bidding 3d if playing wjs is criminal. If 3d is invitational or strong or conventional, then 1nt >>>>> 1S.
The problem is that if partner bids other than in nt, you are almost certainly screwed. 1h-1s-2c - ??? 2d is GF for most people. I suppose one could survive if 3d on this sequence is showing this hand rather than something else. 1h-1s-2h-? 3d is GF. 1h-1s-3h-? You have to pass, 3d might be much better contract.

Even if partner raises spades, you aren't necessarily that happy. 7-4 shapes, on average, you usually want to play in the 7 bagger, unless you have a *nine* plus fit in the side suit. The problem is that when you find a spade fit, finding partner with say a stiff diamond, the opponents force you to ruff in clubs, and you are unable to both establish the diamonds, and draw trumps ending in your hand to run the long diamonds. So instead of providing 5ish tricks with diamonds as trumps, the hand only provides DA and a couple ruffs in clubs or hearts.
Plus, you also have the issue that most players will raise spades on 3 bagger rather often holding some 3514 shape.

I also will cater to the diamonds holding 4 spades and 6 diamonds.

[helene_t]

A very similar hand (4-1-6-2, though) featured in the Bridge Knowledge Test I had to take to get into bridge teacher training in the Netherlands.

The correct answer was 1NT, for the reason Stephen says.

[FelicityR]

Thank you Stephen and Helene for your posts. I assume, if this time using Bergen responses to 1♥, and the bidding goes 1♥ - 1NT - 3♣ - 3♦ shows this hand shape (6+♦s weak or similar), or am I wrong?

Bidding 3NT instead of 3♦ here seems criminal.

[PhilG007]

Absolutely 1NT is the correct response. When you hold a weak hand,as is the case here,its imperative to
convey this information to partner as quickly as possible. While showing the major suit is tempting,
it gives no indication of the point range held. Responding 1NT tells partner "I am very limited. 9 HCP maximum.
Do not get ambitious unless you are very strong" . If partner now bids a second suit asking for preference,you can
now safely bid your diamonds which,in view of your previous limit bid can only mean a weak takeout

[BillPatch]

I also vote for the correct criminal 1 NT rather than the weak jump shift. Although I note that Rubens once commented in the Bridge World that one be good to design as system where the three level weak jump shift was defined as a sub-invitational rather than the really weak hand.

[Stephen Tu]

If you are playing 1h-3d as wjs I don't see why you wouldn't use it. wjs shouldn't be limited to super weak <= 5 hcp hands like some people think; those don't come up often enough (not dealt to begin with, plus opponents not in auction already), and puts way too much pressure on sequences like 1h-1nt-2h-3d, 1s-1nt-2h-3d, as now 3d has to cover like the entire 6-11 ish range, how does opener know what to do?. If wjs are in play in my mind 3d after 1nt should be the invitational end of that range.
Plus if playing semi-forcing NT partner can pass 1nt and that is more likely to be silly than a 3d contract IMO.
Plus if partner jumps to 3H you didn't get to show diamonds which might be better, and after a 3c jump shift your 3d is more nebulous and less descriptive.

Admittedly though 1M-3m as weak is a lot less popular than 1M-3m as invitational, as wjs hands can survive a 1nt response more often than not, and the inv hands are hard to describe if playing 1M-2m as absolute GF rather than the older Lawrence/Eastern scientific style 2/1 + rebid 2/1 suit = inv. But if 3d is wjs I don't see why you would prefer 1nt response. 1nt if 3d is inv or Bergen or other, of course.