Help
Suppose you hold a hand with 5 spades and 2 hearts and equal length in the minors.
You open 1♠ and CHO bids 1NT. Do you reply 2♣ always or do you bid your better minor, or only bid diamonds with significant discrepancy, or... ?
Page 1 of 1
5332
#1
- Csaba the Hutt
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,027
- Joined: 2006-June-16
- Gender:Male
- Interests:bye
Posted 2008-February-09, 11:10
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
#2 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2008-February-09, 11:18
always 10000000000000000000000 % bid 2C plz.
With AKQ of diamonds and 432 of clubs bid 2C plz.
With AKQ of diamonds and 432 of clubs bid 2C plz.
#3
- - - T98765432 AQT8
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,085
- Joined: 2005-June-23
- Gender:Male
- Location:Las Vegas, NV
Posted 2008-February-09, 11:32
I didn't realize this was a controversy!
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
#4
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,695
- Joined: 2006-February-21
- Location:Upper Michigan
- Interests:Music, films, computer programming, politics, bridge
Posted 2008-February-09, 11:35
2♣. Responder's weak 1=4=3=5 hands are a problem in any case. You certainly don't want to go out of your way to bid a 3-card diamond holding.
The growth of wisdom may be gauged exactly by the diminution of ill temper. — Friedrich Nietzsche
The infliction of cruelty with a good conscience is a delight to moralists — that is why they invented hell. — Bertrand Russell
The infliction of cruelty with a good conscience is a delight to moralists — that is why they invented hell. — Bertrand Russell
#5 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2008-February-09, 11:38
Some reasons...
1) Even if you play no systems over this auction, 2C gives partner more room. If he is say 1453 he can bid 2D over your 2C bid. If you bid 2D he cannot bid 3C with 1435 and will have to pass so you can play the 3-3 fit.
1a) You could just play a good system over 2C like bart and cannot play as good of a system over 2D. Some people even bid 2C with 5332 and 2 clubs for this reason.
2) If you can bid 2D on 5233 then your 2D bid loses definition, and you have no increased gain of definition in 2C since it can also be 5233. In general it is bad theoretically to have 2 bids for the same shape, and that is especially true in an auction like this. Usually partner can count on 2D being 4 diamonds unless you are exactly 5332 and can make better decisions because of that. Some people rebid 2C with 5332 also to give 2D even more definition which also ties into 1a.
This is similar to a recent thread asking why you should always bid clubs with equal length after 4S X p 4N p ?. It is better to have more defined shapes rather than worry about suit quality. This is also similar to asking the question "what do you open if you are 5-5 in the majors with much better hearts?" Well of course you don't distort your shape and you open 1H.
1) Even if you play no systems over this auction, 2C gives partner more room. If he is say 1453 he can bid 2D over your 2C bid. If you bid 2D he cannot bid 3C with 1435 and will have to pass so you can play the 3-3 fit.
1a) You could just play a good system over 2C like bart and cannot play as good of a system over 2D. Some people even bid 2C with 5332 and 2 clubs for this reason.
2) If you can bid 2D on 5233 then your 2D bid loses definition, and you have no increased gain of definition in 2C since it can also be 5233. In general it is bad theoretically to have 2 bids for the same shape, and that is especially true in an auction like this. Usually partner can count on 2D being 4 diamonds unless you are exactly 5332 and can make better decisions because of that. Some people rebid 2C with 5332 also to give 2D even more definition which also ties into 1a.
This is similar to a recent thread asking why you should always bid clubs with equal length after 4S X p 4N p ?. It is better to have more defined shapes rather than worry about suit quality. This is also similar to asking the question "what do you open if you are 5-5 in the majors with much better hearts?" Well of course you don't distort your shape and you open 1H.
#6
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,676
- Joined: 2005-February-09
- Gender:Male
- Location:Zurich, Switzerland
Posted 2008-February-09, 12:05
I vote for pass. 
Adam W. Meyerson
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#7 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2008-February-09, 12:37
awm, on Feb 9 2008, 01:05 PM, said:
I vote for pass.
just pretend you have a 15 count adam!
#8
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,290
- Joined: 2004-May-03
- Gender:Male
- Location:London, England
Posted 2008-February-09, 13:01
Jlall, on Feb 9 2008, 06:37 PM, said:
awm, on Feb 9 2008, 01:05 PM, said:
I vote for pass.
just pretend you have a 15 count adam!
I thought we opened 1♠?
#9
- Csaba the Hutt
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,027
- Joined: 2006-June-16
- Gender:Male
- Interests:bye
Posted 2008-February-09, 13:08
I think Justin was referring to this: http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...ndpost&p=253085
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
#10
- Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,586
- Joined: 2005-September-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
- Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor
Posted 2008-February-09, 13:46
Ditto the above.
I take this to the extreme and would rebid 2♣ after 1♥-P-1NT-P-? with 4531 pattern rather than 2♦.
I take this to the extreme and would rebid 2♣ after 1♥-P-1NT-P-? with 4531 pattern rather than 2♦.
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."
-P.J. Painter.
-P.J. Painter.
#11
- - - T98765432 AQT8
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,085
- Joined: 2005-June-23
- Gender:Male
- Location:Las Vegas, NV
Posted 2008-February-09, 14:44
kenrexford, on Feb 9 2008, 02:46 PM, said:
Ditto the above.
I take this to the extreme and would rebid 2♣ after 1♥-P-1NT-P-? with 4531 pattern rather than 2♦.
I take this to the extreme and would rebid 2♣ after 1♥-P-1NT-P-? with 4531 pattern rather than 2♦.
At some point you might as well just switch 1♠ and 1NT
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
#12
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,695
- Joined: 2006-February-21
- Location:Upper Michigan
- Interests:Music, films, computer programming, politics, bridge
Posted 2008-February-09, 17:21
jdonn, on Feb 9 2008, 03:44 PM, said:
At some point you might as well just switch 1♠ and 1NT
It was really irritating when the 1♠ - 1N intechange was taken off the ACBL's GCC.
The growth of wisdom may be gauged exactly by the diminution of ill temper. — Friedrich Nietzsche
The infliction of cruelty with a good conscience is a delight to moralists — that is why they invented hell. — Bertrand Russell
The infliction of cruelty with a good conscience is a delight to moralists — that is why they invented hell. — Bertrand Russell
#13
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,727
- Joined: 2006-June-05
- Location:Oslo, Norway
- Interests:Bridge, sports, Sci-fi, fantasy
Posted 2008-February-10, 02:07
awm, on Feb 9 2008, 07:05 PM, said:
I vote for pass.
Me too. Then I do play 1NT as NF.
Kind regards,
Harald
Harald
#14
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,208
- Joined: 2007-July-01
- Gender:Male
- Location:Michigan
- Interests:Science, Sports
Posted 2008-February-11, 09:34
Jlall, on Feb 9 2008, 12:38 PM, said:
Some reasons...
1) Even if you play no systems over this auction, 2C gives partner more room. If he is say 1453 he can bid 2D over your 2C bid. If you bid 2D he cannot bid 3C with 1435 and will have to pass so you can play the 3-3 fit.
1a) You could just play a good system over 2C like bart and cannot play as good of a system over 2D. Some people even bid 2C with 5332 and 2 clubs for this reason.
2) If you can bid 2D on 5233 then your 2D bid loses definition, and you have no increased gain of definition in 2C since it can also be 5233. In general it is bad theoretically to have 2 bids for the same shape, and that is especially true in an auction like this. Usually partner can count on 2D being 4 diamonds unless you are exactly 5332 and can make better decisions because of that. Some people rebid 2C with 5332 also to give 2D even more definition which also ties into 1a.
1) Even if you play no systems over this auction, 2C gives partner more room. If he is say 1453 he can bid 2D over your 2C bid. If you bid 2D he cannot bid 3C with 1435 and will have to pass so you can play the 3-3 fit.
1a) You could just play a good system over 2C like bart and cannot play as good of a system over 2D. Some people even bid 2C with 5332 and 2 clubs for this reason.
2) If you can bid 2D on 5233 then your 2D bid loses definition, and you have no increased gain of definition in 2C since it can also be 5233. In general it is bad theoretically to have 2 bids for the same shape, and that is especially true in an auction like this. Usually partner can count on 2D being 4 diamonds unless you are exactly 5332 and can make better decisions because of that. Some people rebid 2C with 5332 also to give 2D even more definition which also ties into 1a.
Agree with all of this.
Learned the hard way playing money bridge with GIB.
Kevin Fay
#15
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 913
- Joined: 2003-August-18
- Location:California, USA
Posted 2008-February-11, 13:50
2♣ always, even on 5=3=3=2 (assuming partnership agreement, of course).
Let's define a losing case as where we end up in a six-card fit.
2♣ has a single losing case: partner has 1=4=4=4. We end up in 4-2 clubs instead of 4-3 diamonds.
2♦ has these losing cases:
Also, 2♣ gives you a better chance that the opponents will balance and rescue you from your six-card fit. They must exists some hands where an opponent would chance 2♦ over 2♣ but would not bid 3♣ over 2♦ on the same hand with the minors reversed.
Given that 2♣ more often works better constructively as well, this is a no brainer to me.
By the way, I'm equally fine with 1♥-1NT-2♣ on 3=5=3=2. There are no losing cases at all for 2♣, but 3=1=3=6 with weak clubs is still problematic for 2♦.
Playing this way also handles the dreaded 4=5=2=2 nicely for those of us whose wouldn't be caught dead playing F******y or need 2♦ for something else in their methods.
Let's define a losing case as where we end up in a six-card fit.
2♣ has a single losing case: partner has 1=4=4=4. We end up in 4-2 clubs instead of 4-3 diamonds.
2♦ has these losing cases:
- 1=4=3=5
- 1=3=3=6 with weak clubs
- 0=4=3=6 with weak clubs
Also, 2♣ gives you a better chance that the opponents will balance and rescue you from your six-card fit. They must exists some hands where an opponent would chance 2♦ over 2♣ but would not bid 3♣ over 2♦ on the same hand with the minors reversed.
Given that 2♣ more often works better constructively as well, this is a no brainer to me.
By the way, I'm equally fine with 1♥-1NT-2♣ on 3=5=3=2. There are no losing cases at all for 2♣, but 3=1=3=6 with weak clubs is still problematic for 2♦.
Playing this way also handles the dreaded 4=5=2=2 nicely for those of us whose wouldn't be caught dead playing F******y or need 2♦ for something else in their methods.
Page 1 of 1