[JT23456]

Responding to 1♣ - skipping over a 4 card ♦ suit - is common and on the CC. How often do good players skip over a medium 5 card ♦ suit, say KJxxx ? How much does it depend on the quality of the ♥ or ♠ suit.

[hrothgar]

 JT23456, on 2018-January-14, 13:07, said:

Responding to 1♣ - skipping over a 4 card ♦ suit - is common and on the CC. How often do good players skip over a medium 5 card ♦ suit, say KJxxx ? How much does it depend on the quality of the ♥ or ♠ suit.

Speaking only for myself, its not so much an issue of suit quality or even necessarily Diamond length.

If my hand is only worth one bid, I am going to show the major.

The sorts of hands where I would show the Diamond suit first are ones where I would want to make a natural NF 2D bid after opener's 1N rebid.

Suppose I got dealt

Kx
5432
QT9876
x

Here, I would respond 1♦ over 1♣, rebid 2♦ over 1♠ or 1N and pass over 1♥

[spotlight7]

 JT23456, on 2018-January-14, 13:07, said:

Responding to 1♣ - skipping over a 4 card ♦ suit - is common and on the CC. How often do good players skip over a medium 5 card ♦ suit, say KJxxx ? How much does it depend on the quality of the ♥ or ♠ suit.

There are two main styles for skipping over/bidding 1D holding a 4 card major.

The first group is hands worth a later invite(10+), these tend to bid 1D and they tend to invite next.

The second group bids 1M with 6-11H+CP hands. With 12+ and 5+ Ds, bidding 1D first and a later bid of a M shows 12+


The 'up the line' bidders tend to bid 1D which sometimes has problems finding a major fit when the other pair competes.

[ggwhiz]

The money is in the majors for just-in games or 140 vs 130, particularly at mp's so how often? Almost always and with appropriate 4-6 hands too.

We built in a safety valve for weak hands, say 1m - 1M - 1nt where 2♣/♦ would be checking back for a major fit, we bid 3♣/♦ to play showing 4 in the major and a longer minor.

It's an overall winner long term imo.

[helene_t]

 hrothgar, on 2018-January-14, 14:16, said:

Kx
5432
QT98765
x

14 cards

[hrothgar]

 helene_t, on 2018-January-14, 21:24, said:

14 cards

thanks. fixed it

[nekthen]

How long until we join the experts and use transfers over 1♣ as standard? I already do IRL, soon it will be as normal as transfers over 1N

[gwnn]

I agree, but who's we?

[nekthen]

 gwnn, on 2018-January-15, 06:15, said:

I agree, but who's we?

You and me for a start!

[mikestar13]

 hrothgar, on 2018-January-14, 14:16, said:

...
Suppose I got dealt

Kx
5432
QT9876
x

Here, I would respond 1♦ over 1♣, rebid 2♦ over 1♠ or 1N and pass over 1♥

This is exactly the right way to play Walsh style IMO, but I've known Walsh purist who would respond 1♥ even with ♠K in hrothgar's example changed to ♦K.

[msjennifer]

Personally,I do not like to byepass one diamond (4carder)If the four card major is only equally strong only.So If I hold xx-Q10xx--Q10xx-AQx I do respond 1D as later on a competitive negative double is available (if opponents bid spades).However, If the hand has less than 10 HCP and is flat and with 9 or 10 losers, I opt go for the major as that hand warrants only one bid( ( say,the club K replaces the AQ in the given hand) However ,when my hand has only 8 or less losers ,2 winners and deserves to make 2 bids I start with a 1D response.As also,based on these conditions I never byepass a 5 carder D suit headed by A ,K or Q.as that is handy in a NT contract if opener is worried about Diamonds.Finally ,in short, it depends upon the virtues and values of the hand

[mikestar13]

I count five fundamental styles of responding to a natural 1♠ opener::

1. Up the line.

2 .Majors first, unless invitational+.

3. Majors first, unless game forcing

4. MAFIA , which is majors first always.

5 Transfers.

With variation on whether to permit deviations on certain hands such as hrothgar's example.

For me, 5>4>3>2>1, and I allow well-judged deviations.

[GrahamJson]

Unless playing with a regular partner with a well drilled system I would not recommend bypassing a diamond suit. From what I have seen this results in missing major suit fits more than finding them.Why? Because if you respond 1S, say, and subsequently rebid in diamonds how does partner know which is longer. It’s fine if you have a detailed understanding with partner on this point (e.g. transfers after a 1NT rebid) but without this you are likely to miss 5-3 major suit fits. Or, even worse, end up in a silly 4-2 fit. I have seen it happen many times on BBO.

Bidding Walsh style may have theoretical advantages, as may transfer responses. But they both require a lot of discussion and no little memorising. I’m not convinced that they are worth the effort.

[miamijd]

There is another method besides up the line and Walsh, sort of a split the difference approach. It is more East coast (Walsh is more West Coast). In this approach you bypass 1d with all 4/4 hands pretty much regardless of strength and some 5/4 hands (if the major is good and the minor is weak and the hand is less than an invite). 64 hands bid 1d

Any of the methods is quite playable. A lot depends on what methods you like on subsequent rounds. Another factor is what you open with 4-4 in the minors. If you almost always open 1d then Walsh works ok. If you like to open 1c sometimes, depending on the strength of your suits, then bypassing 1d with 5 and 6 card suits can be costly if the opponents get the bidding high quickly in a major

Cheers
Mike

[miamijd]

There is another method besides up the line and Walsh, sort of a split the difference approach. It is more East coast (Walsh is more West Coast). In this approach you bypass 1d with all 4/4 hands pretty much regardless of strength and some 5/4 hands (if the major is good and the minor is weak and the hand is less than an invite). 64 hands bid 1d

Any of the methods is quite playable. A lot depends on what methods you like on subsequent rounds. Another factor is what you open with 4-4 in the minors. If you almost always open 1d then Walsh works ok. If you like to open 1c sometimes, depending on the strength of your suits, then bypassing 1d with 5 and 6 card suits can be costly if the opponents get the bidding high quickly in a major

Cheers
Mike

[miamijd]

There is another method besides up the line and Walsh, sort of a split the difference approach. It is more East coast (Walsh is more West Coast). In this approach you bypass 1d with all 4/4 hands pretty much regardless of strength and some 5/4 hands (if the major is good and the minor is weak and the hand is less than an invite). 64 hands bid 1d

Any of the methods is quite playable. A lot depends on what methods you like on subsequent rounds. Another factor is what you open with 4-4 in the minors. If you almost always open 1d then Walsh works ok. If you like to open 1c sometimes, depending on the strength of your suits, then bypassing 1d with 5 and 6 card suits can be costly if the opponents get the bidding high quickly in a major

Cheers
Mike

[miamijd]

There is another method besides up the line and Walsh, sort of a split the difference approach. It is more East coast (Walsh is more West Coast). In this approach you bypass 1d with all 4/4 hands pretty much regardless of strength and some 5/4 hands (if the major is good and the minor is weak and the hand is less than an invite). 64 hands bid 1d

Any of the methods is quite playable. A lot depends on what methods you like on subsequent rounds. Another factor is what you open with 4-4 in the minors. If you almost always open 1d then Walsh works ok. If you like to open 1c sometimes, depending on the strength of your suits, then bypassing 1d with 5 and 6 card suits can be costly if the opponents get the bidding high quickly in a major

Cheers
Mike

[Vampyr]

 miamijd, on 2018-January-15, 18:25, said:

There is another method besides up the line and Walsh, sort of a split the difference approach. It is more East coast (Walsh is more West Coast). In this approach you bypass 1d with all 4/4 hands pretty much regardless of strength and some 5/4 hands (if the major is good and the minor is weak and the hand is less than an invite). 64 hands bid 1d

Any of the methods is quite playable. A lot depends on what methods you like on subsequent rounds. Another factor is what you open with 4-4 in the minors. If you almost always open 1d then Walsh works ok. If you like to open 1c sometimes, depending on the strength of your suits, then bypassing 1d with 5 and 6 card suits can be costly if the opponents get the bidding high quickly in a major

Cheers
Mike

OK! We get the idea!

[PhilG007]

 hrothgar, on 2018-January-14, 14:16, said:

Speaking only for myself, its not so much an issue of suit quality or even necessarily Diamond length.

If my hand is only worth one bid, I am going to show the major.

The sorts of hands where I would show the Diamond suit first are ones where I would want to make a natural NF 2D bid after opener's 1N rebid.

Suppose I got dealt

Kx
5432
QT9876
x

Here, I would respond 1♦ over 1♣, rebid 2♦ over 1♠ or 1N and pass over 1♥

I would respond 1NT on the above deal Unlike an opening 1NT responder does need not a balanced hand to make the bid
He is simply showing limited pointage.

[el mister]

 nekthen, on 2018-January-15, 04:16, said:

How long until we join the experts and use transfers over 1♣ as standard? I already do IRL, soon it will be as normal as transfers over 1N

How easy is it to fit transfer Walsh into an existing 2/1 system? I'd like to play it, but I've seen some notes that point to it being quite a comprehensive, systemic overhaul - if that's the case then it's not going to be feasible in my main two partnerships. If it's simpler than that, as your 1NT transfer analogy suggests, then I should get on with learning it.