[whereagles]

hum.. that's interesting. Seems like the US is heading strongly into the "shape first" philosophy (most 2/1 versions are like this too). Wonder how you guys are going to sort out the level afterwards

[JLOL]

whereagles, on May 12 2009, 06:24 PM, said:

hum.. that's interesting. Seems like the US is heading strongly into the "shape first" philosophy (most 2/1 versions are like this too). Wonder how you guys are going to sort out the level afterwards

LOL

[mike777]

"Nowadays, at least in USA expert circles, one of the messages that the jump rebid tends to convey is "I have a suit-oriented hand"."


Very helpful comment regarding jump rebids and with examples, ty.

Not stated but on this deal, given the poll results, there seems to a wide difference of opinion on which 6-4 hands should be upgrade to a reverse and which should not be. Here is hoping for more comments. (btw as a nonexpert i voted 2c rebid.)


1C - 1S - ?
♠x ♥Kxxx ♦AQ ♣KQJxxx

[Phil]

JLOL, on May 12 2009, 02:40 PM, said:

The thought of rebidding 2C with this hand makes me sick. If you want to bid 3C then you might as well bid 2H along the way.

Yes these are my thoughts. The ♦Q is questionable, but the 6th club more than offsets.

[the hog]

Not good enough to reverse. This is a 2C rebid.

[655321]

2♥

[fred]

whereagles, on May 12 2009, 11:24 PM, said:

hum.. that's interesting. Seems like the US is heading strongly into the "shape first" philosophy (most 2/1 versions are like this too). Wonder how you guys are going to sort out the level afterwards

If your post was in response to mine, then I am afraid you have it backwards.

Note my reference to "playing strength". That is a roughly the same as saying "trick-taking potential".

When you wonder how us guys are going to "sort out the level afterwards", it is actually a lot easier in the style I describe (because the style I describe focuses on trick-taking potential and knowing the trick-taking potential of your partner's hand is obviously of the utmost importance in terms of "sorting out the level").

Rebidding 2C with this hand makes it hard to "sort out the level" because partner will not normally expect this much playing strength for a 2C rebid. Since I think you are one of those people who sometimes rebids 2C with bad hands that contain an indifferent 5-card club suit, I really don't understand how you can advocate rebidding 2C with this hand as well.

And to describe this as "shape first" is wrong. It is "tricks first" - the hand in question has enough trick-taking potential to make a statement like "my hand is too strong offensively to rebid 2C". That is the primary message you should be trying to convey. The fact that you happen to hold 4 hearts means that you have a secondary message that needs to be delivered - that is why you rebid 2H instead of 3C.

If your post was in response to someone else's post then sorry about the confusion.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[helene_t]

If p has a weak hand with long spades we will end up in 3♠ after a reverse. If p can't have that because of his failure to make a WJS, it's close IMHO. Otherwise I don't think it's close.

[whereagles]

Fred: yeah, I was responding to your post.

After giving it a second thought, I think we're probably talking about the same thing. Around here the standard definition of 1x-1y-3x is a 1-suiter with something like ~15-17 hcp OR equivalent playing strength.

What I mean is that it seems to me the US style is heading more towards the 'equivalent playing strength' variant, leaving the hcp-based variant to rebid 3x only if the suit is very good. Else one bids either 2x (if min) or a new 3-card suit (if max). Agree?

Since I think you are one of those people who sometimes rebids 2C with bad hands that contain an indifferent 5-card club suit, I really don't understand how you can advocate rebidding 2C with this hand as well.

Who said I bid 2♣? I reverse (with 4 hearts) or rebid 3♣ (if no hearts).

[fred]

whereagles, on May 13 2009, 05:04 PM, said:

Fred: yeah, I was responding to your post.

After giving it a second thought, I think we're probably talking about the same thing. Around here the standard definition of 1x-1y-3x is a 1-suiter with something like ~15-17 hcp OR equivalent playing strength.

What I mean is that it seems to me the US style is heading more towards the 'equivalent playing strength' variant, leaving the hcp-based variant to rebid 3x only if the suit is very good. Else one bids either 2x (if min) or a new 3-card suit (if max). Agree?

Since I think you are one of those people who sometimes rebids 2C with bad hands that contain an indifferent 5-card club suit, I really don't understand how you can advocate rebidding 2C with this hand as well.

Who said I bid 2♣? I reverse (with 4 hearts) or rebid 3♣ (if no hearts).

OK thanks for clarifying. It sounds like we are more or less on the same page as far as these issues are concerned. I do try to avoid bidding 3-card suits (I am you are not thrilled with the concept either), but occasionally I will do so as a least of evils choice.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[zhams]

if partner rebid 2♠,can bid 3♣again.