[antonylee]

With 6M4m, it is standard to rebid the major if weak (so that one can introduce the minor at the 3-level if needed) and the minor if strong (as one can reverse back into the major if responder doesn't pass). With 6♠4♥, I believe it is standard to always introduce ♥s with opener's second bid (so as not to miss the 4-4 ♥ game). But what about 6♦4♣ hands?

[mike777]

same thought process, rebid 2d with most hands.

Now you hve limited your opening bid, rebidding 2c your range is much much wider.

Sure in theory you may miss a club fit but who ever cares about the club suit if pard cant bid them

[Codo]

I am not sure what is standard, but I would always rebid the clubs. The idea is always the same: Show 9 cards with your second bid instead of just 6- or - in some rare circumstances just five.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

You are right.
Bidding 6-4-6 is stronger than 6-6-4 .

[lalldonn]

I would usually rebid 2♣ unless playing precision.

[gszes]

both major suits are good for game. Neither minor is generally all that
great for game. When you have the minors we are primarily interested in
NT. With that in mind I would generally prefer to stress my 6 card minor to
advertising my 2nd minor. The main reason for this is that 3n may be a
ton easier to reach if p can count on possible 6 tricks than knowing you
are some 45 54 55 64 distribution in the minors. I would not rebid a bad
6 card suit like Kxxxxx if i had a reasonable 4 card club suit.

[MrAce]

I read an article, long time ago admitedly, but cant remember the source now. It was either ACBL magazine or something else. Sorry can't remember where it was

Article was about exactly the same thing you are asking, except that it was about 6M+4m and what to rebid, with statistical feedback.

Basically it was telling that at IMPS starting with your minor is almost always better regardless of your strength unless there is huge quality difference between the suits. At MP it said it was very close slightly favouring the major rebid but even at MP it was not a huge advantage. I remember the author gave a lot of examples with the possible outcomes and scores.

But i think the article was based on mostly when responder bids 1NT.

1♠--1NT
2♣ allows responder to bid his 6 card ♦ suit for example (or 2♦ by opener allows responder to bid his ♥ suit )


I personally almost always bid my minor, just like Codo. Because most of the time finding 6-2 fit for partscore purposes will be easy. Downside is of course when pd holds 3 of the minor and stiff in the major, but i think this type of hands are overrated both in frequency and outcome, although it is right to play your 6-1 fit as oppose to 4-3 minor. People easily forget finding the 4-4 fits, 4-5 fits, 4-6 fits and usually obsess on downside of playing a 4-3 fit when 6-1 was available.

[Zelandakh]

My impression of this theme is that it is something of an American-European division thing. That is, Americans tend to rebid the 6 card suit with a weak hand whilst Europeans are more inclined to show the second suit regardless of strength. This is clearly a hopelessly simplified generalisation and someone will probably answer with plenty of exceptions - nonetheless whenever I see this come up I notice the same pattern of responses.

[MrAce]

 Zelandakh, on 2012-September-28, 03:37, said:

My impression of this theme is that it is something of an American-European division thing.

I think you are right.

I am agreeing with you and taking the risk of being asked how many countries exist in Europe and how many languages they use how many of them i actually went and made a research about 6-4 hands, how many species live in europe etc etc...