Walsh - inv 4+M5+om
#1
Posted 2005-September-20, 23:33
1. Do i skip the 1D even with much longer diamonds, say 6D4M or 7D4M ?(invite)
2. What do i bid with the 5/6 om and 4M invite, after 1m-1M-1nt ?
I used to have 3om to show 5+om,4M but after few boards with 54 i find out i dont like it much cause we played at 3 level with 7 card fit instead of better 2nt contract (system is design for mp), on the other hand with 6om and 4M its definetly make sense to bid 3om.
So what do you think, should we use 3om to show 4M and 6 (sometime good 5) om, and with most 5/4 invite with a nat 2nt ?
#2 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2005-September-20, 23:43
#3
Posted 2005-September-20, 23:46
#4
Posted 2005-September-21, 00:05
1D response and then major=game force..keep it simple.
See XYZ, 2 way checkback to help but not solve this issue 100%.
You must choose to live with the issue of 4 card major ..longer minor invite.
btw in real life:
1) with active opp they will overcall and you can just bid your hand normal old fashion.
2) you bid 2nt many times with invite hand. You must decide is your hand invite 2nt or 3 of minor weak with partner passing often?
Based on my limited experience this is a Bridge World Bidding Challenge more than a real world problem. If your mileage varies let me know.
#5
Posted 2005-September-21, 00:39
Here's a 2-way checkback structure over 1C 1D 1N structure I've played that's designed to deal with the invitational hands as well as the GF hands: (taken from my system notes with the side comments and all)
2C forces 2D (signoff or inv), 2D forces 2H (GF)
2C 2D = signoff
3C = signoff
2M = inv 4M 5+D no 3C (to parallel the direct 2NT)
2C 2D 2M = inv 4M 5+D 3C ("slow shows doubt of strain")
2D 2H 2S/2N = GF 5+D 4H/4S respectively (try to rightside 4M?)
2NT = inv balanced, no 4C no 4M
2C 2D 2NT = inv 5+D 4+C no 4M, more NT oriented
2C 2D 3C = inv 5+D 4+C no 4M, more suit oriented
2D 2H 3C = GF 5+D 4+C
2C 2D 3D = inv 6+D no 4M
3D or 2D 2H 3D = both GF strong suit, direct = less doubt
3M = GF at least 5M 6D
2D 2H 3M = splinter for clubs
Andy
PS It seems I didn't define 2C 2D 3M, which I guess is an autosplinter, or the 2 extra ways to bid 3NT. Presumably 2C 2D 3NT and 2D 2H 3NT are a bit slammish -- probably the former has 5 diamonds and the latter doesn't. Also I guess we never bid 1D with 4M-4D GF -- minor tweaks could rectify this if you want to bid 1D with such.
#6
Posted 2005-September-21, 00:53
kfgauss, on Sep 21 2005, 01:39 AM, said:
Look!
If you want to bid 1D with invite and 4 card major fine..just do not play Walsh.
Many very good forum posters do not play Walsh!
Many World Class players do not play Walsh and have strong negative comments about it!
If you are going to play Walsh, and I do, then live with it.
Bid 4 card major before longer minor invite and practice it. If you hate it do not play it.
If you solve the big issue publish and get rich..so far no one has
#7
Posted 2005-September-21, 01:12
mike777, on Sep 21 2005, 06:53 AM, said:
If you want to bid 1D with invite and 4 card major fine..just do not play Walsh.
Many very good forum posters do not play Walsh!
Many World Class players do not play Walsh and have strong negative comments about it!
If you are going to play Walsh, and I do, then live with it.
Bid 4 card major before longer minor invite and practice it. If you hate it do not play it.
If you solve the big issue publish and get rich..so far no one has
Flame asked for suggestions about inv 4M 5+D hands and I gave what I think are some useful structures over 1C-1D;1N to help opener continue to bypass 1M and bid 1N when balanced. Clearly either way is fine. Perhaps to you "Walsh" means always bypassing unless GF and maybe that's the original/"official" structure, but clearly Flame had some doubts about the invitational hands and wasn't asking a textbook question about Walsh. An essential point of Walsh -- being able to rebid 1N after 1C-1D when balanced -- is preserved in my suggestion.
Sorry if you seem to disagree with my ideas (ie about Drury too). I really mean no harm and am just getting ideas out there.
Andy
#8
Posted 2005-September-21, 01:37
Using Walsh, after
1C-1M-1NT-?
I use one of the many versions of xyz.
So now responder bids 2C, puppet to 2D, and after the forced puppet, I rebid 3D. That is usually 64 or a very good 5 card diamond suit.
With 5431 and a modest suit and/or Notrump oriented values, I rebid 2NT invitational.
There might be, admittedly, cases where the hand will play better in a minor, but if pard has a weak NT hand and we have a featureless invitational hand, it seems to me this should occurr not so often.
The alternative potential game contract (a Moysian in major) should be ruled out by the fact that opener denied a 3 card raise.
#9
Posted 2005-September-21, 04:52
XYZ:
2♣ transfer to 2♦, tehn 3♦
roudi:
2NT trtansfer to 3♣ then 3♦
NMF:
I have no clue
#10 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2005-September-21, 08:14
#11
Posted 2005-September-21, 08:35
#12 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2005-September-21, 08:39
MickyB, on Sep 21 2005, 09:35 AM, said:
I agree that the 4-5 invites are better bid starting with 1D. The problem is in walsh youre supposed to bid 1M (apparantly). He was looking to solutions to this, one of them obviously being starting with 1D.
#13
Posted 2005-September-21, 10:36
#14
Posted 2005-September-21, 11:46
4324
4225
Presumably opener would rebid 1♠ with the second pattern, and raise to 2♥ (or bid 1♠) with the first. So inviting in diamonds via 2♣ followed by 3♦ is perfectly safe even on five.
After 1♣-1♠ things are slightly worse, in that 2425 is a possibility, but this is relatively unlikely. For Elianna and me (playing frequent 3-card raises) the possibilities for 1NT rebid would be:
3433
3334
2344
2335
2425
2245
1345
1435
Note that only one pattern contains doubleton diamond, and this pattern is substantially less likely than the first three patterns on the list. Of course, we don't actually play Walsh responses either.
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#15
Posted 2005-September-21, 17:24
invitational hands 5m4M are easy imo (2 way or xyz, etc), so are the strong hands
#16
Posted 2005-September-21, 17:31
From experience, this seems to work well.
-P.J. Painter.
#17
Posted 2005-September-22, 01:35
luke warm, on Sep 21 2005, 11:24 PM, said:
invitational hands 5m4M are easy imo (2 way or xyz, etc), so are the strong hands
Quite frankly, I think that such thing as an "invitational" 7D-4M is quite a rare bird
In theory, perhaps, but in practice, I think I'll always force to game:
so, treating it as GF, it makes sense to start off with 1D response.
For 64 shapes things are a bit less clear, but the main point IMO, is deciding right away whether we are going to treat the hand as a "bad" GF, starting with 1D response, or as a "good" invitational hand, starting with a 1M response.

Help
