[phoenixmj]

Hello - we have recently been introduced to Walsh style responses to 1C.

I have today found what appears to be two conflicting options responding to a 1 club opener with 4D, and 4 of a major. Based on reading the Larry Cohen article online, it appears that his approach calls for bidding the 4 card diamond suit (even with a 4 card major) if the responder has an opening hand. Other articles I have read and also my notes from a class we took - indicates that if you have 4 card diamonds and 4 card major, you should bid the major first regardless of strength. If you have 5+ diamonds and also an opening hand (the ability to bid 2 times) then you would bid the diamonds first and then the major on your second bid.

What is the correct (most used) approach to having 4 diamonds and 4 of a major with enough points to take a second bid (i.e. an opening hand.)

Thanks in advance.

[fromageGB]

Bear in mind that I don't play Walsh style ...

It seems to me that Cohen has it right. When you introduce the major, opener is much more likely to bid NT rather than support diamonds, whether you are known to have 5 or not. The only time you will play in diamonds is when opener is unbalanced or there is a missing suit, and opener will then have a genuine diamond suit of his own. When that happens, 4 or 5 is moot.

[Stephen Tu]

Major first with equal length. Diamonds first if longer and gf.

Do you have a pointer to the Cohen article? I think you probably misread it.

[apollo1201]

Haha I’d say D first if 5 vs. 4M, or if much better honor quality when 44, and GF in both cases. Otherwise, Major.

[dokoko]

Partner will suppress his major after 1♣-1♦ with a balanced hand. If you have the tools to find a fit in your major (some kind of checkback) after a 1NT rebid, you may bid a 4-card diamond suit first. If you have not then start with the major and be prepared to lose a diamond fit if it is there.

Anyway don't bid 1♦ if you don't want to play in diamonds. If the only choice is between 3NT and 4 of your major there is no point in bidding a longer diamond suit.

[phoenixmj]

Stephen Tu, on 2019-January-04, 12:26, said:

Major first with equal length. Diamonds first if longer and gf.

Do you have a pointer to the Cohen article? I think you probably misread it.

https://www.larryco....les/walsh-style

"The theory is that with a "one-bid" hand you bypass diamonds so you can make sure to introduce your 4-card major into the auction. If you know you will get to bid twice, you can bid your diamonds first (even with 4-4 in diamonds and the major). "Knowing you can bid twice," means responder has at least opening-bid strength."

I was very surprised to see this. Please let me know if I am mis-reading it.

[Stephen Tu]

Interesting. That's surprising, I've never seen this advocated before, nor noticed top players bidding 1d this way on 4-4. Unfortunately he doesn't supply any rationale.

IMO, I think it's usually mistake with 4-4, because 95 percent you are headed for 3nt, and why reveal diamonds to opps? Maybe they lead a diamond for you. Bidding the major leads to less revealing 1c 1M 1n 3n auctions.

The only time I'd really break this is with 3 suited short in major, with club support, where I want to bid all suits so I can find 5m or 4M on a moysian when partner doesn't have much in my shortness.

[rmnka447]

I think people are missing a key factor in Cohen's article. Beyond the previous quote, he goes on to say that with a minimum balanced hand opener does not rebid a 4 card major but must rebid 1 NT.

A 1 ♦ response is made with a hand that has diamonds with no major OR a hand with ♦ and a major with which responder can reverse. So if opener bids 1 NT over 1 ♦ with a balanced hand containing a major, a major fit may still be found be found when responder reverses into the major --

1 ♣ - 1 ♦
1 NT - 2 ♥/2 ♠

is GF and shows ♦ and the major bid. And if responder doesn't reverse, then opener knows there is no 4 card major in responder's hand.

The only thing odd about Cohen's assertion is that the ♦ bid can be made with only 4 ♦. As most posters have suggested, it's more usual for ♦ to be longer when holding a major when making a 1 ♦ response. The advantage in doing as Cohen suggests is that opener gives away the least information when the contract is in NT or in a minor. Also, any auction that goes --

1 ♣ - 1 ♦
1 M

must show an unbalanced opening hand with a real ♣ suit and a 4 card major.

The other side of this discussion is exactly how distributional responder can be in favoring a major response vs. a 1 ♦ response is just how unbalanced that responder can get with one bid hand. Certainly everyone would have no problem favoring 1 ♥ on something like ♠ xx ♥ KQxx ♦ Qxxxx ♣ xx. But what about ♠ KJxx ♥ xx ♦ QJxxxx ♣ x or even ♠ KQxx ♥ xx ♦ Jxxxxxx. These are good issues for each partnership to decide.

[phoenixmj]

rmnka447, on 2019-January-05, 14:17, said:

I think people are missing a key factor in Cohen's article. Beyond the previous quote, he goes on to say that with a minimum balanced hand opener does not rebid a 4 card major but must rebid 1 NT.

A 1 ♦ response is made with a hand that has diamonds with no major OR a hand with ♦ and a major with which responder can reverse. So if opener bids 1 NT over 1 ♦ with a balanced hand containing a major, a major fit may still be found be found when responder reverses into the major --

1 ♣ - 1 ♦
1 NT - 2 ♥/2 ♠

is GF and shows ♦ and the major bid. And if responder doesn't reverse, then opener knows there is no 4 card major in responder's hand.

The only thing odd about Cohen's assertion is that the ♦ bid can be made with only 4 ♦. As most posters have suggested, it's more usual for ♦ to be longer when holding a major when making a 1 ♦ response. The advantage in doing as Cohen suggests is that opener gives away the least information when the contract is in NT or in a minor. Also, any auction that goes --

1 ♣ - 1 ♦
1 M

must show an unbalanced opening hand with a real ♣ suit and a 4 card major.

The other side of this discussion is exactly how distributional responder can be in favoring a major response vs. a 1 ♦ response is just how unbalanced that responder can get with one bid hand. Certainly everyone would have no problem favoring 1 ♥ on something like ♠ xx ♥ KQxx ♦ Qxxxx ♣ xx. But what about ♠ KJxx ♥ xx ♦ QJxxxx ♣ x or even ♠ KQxx ♥ xx ♦ Jxxxxxx. These are good issues for each partnership to decide.

We bid the major first if we cannot reverse - regardless of how unbalanced the hand may be. But I think this is partnership agreement.

NOW - another questions -

How unbalanced does OPENER have to be to bid 1H or 1S instead of 1NT? If the bidding goes 1c, 1d (responder), 1H - does that imply a singleton/void in one of the other suits - OR are 2 doubletons sufficient? Suppose opener has a hand with a shape xx, xxxx, xxx, xxxxx - is this an unbalanced hand? Should the opener bid 1H if partner responded 1D?

Thanks in advance.

[rmnka447]

phoenixmj, on 2019-January-05, 17:26, said:

We bid the major first if we cannot reverse - regardless of how unbalanced the hand may be. But I think this is partnership agreement.

Exactly, there are just some people who think it's just hideous to bid a 4 card major when holding 6 ♦. But if as Larry Cohen suggests, opener rebids 1 NT with any balanced hand that may have a 4 card major, responder faces a dilemma holding such a hand without reversing values. If responder reverses and bids the major, opener will think responder's hand is a lot better than it is. If responder doesn't rebid the major, a 4-4 major fit could be lost.

I'm not sure there is any "right' answer, but partnerships need to assess their tolerance for whatever they choose being wrong.

Quote

NOW - another questions -

How unbalanced does OPENER have to be to bid 1H or 1S instead of 1NT? If the bidding goes 1c, 1d (responder), 1H - does that imply a singleton/void in one of the other suits - OR are 2 doubletons sufficient? Suppose opener has a hand with a shape xx, xxxx, xx, xxxxx - is this an unbalanced hand? Should the opener bid 1H if partner responded 1D?

Thanks in advance.

I think it is again something that is subject to partnership agreement. The hands that are on the cusp between 1 NT and 1 of a major rebid are the 5-4-2-2 hands. IMO, if the strength of these hands are in the long suits, it seems like rebidding the major would be preferable -- ♠ AKxx ♥ xx ♦ xx ♣ AQxxx. If the strength is in the short suits then 1 NT is probably preferable ♠ Q10xx ♥ Ax ♦ AQ ♣ Jxxxx. In between, take your pick.

The rebid of a major establishes that opener has at least 4 ♣ (as could be 4=4=1=4) but is usually 5+. That's sometimes very useful for responder to know in the ensuing auction (something like xxx xx xxxxx xxx with no stopper in the unbid major).

[fromageGB]

Thank you all for the elucidation; I said I don't play this. One thing eludes me in this style, and that is how you find a 4-4 major fit when responder has a fairly weak hand with both 4 card majors, if opener rebids 1NT with a balanced sort of hand that may or may not have 4 cards in the other major. Or does opener with a 4333 shape bid 1♣ 1♥ 1♠? On the sound of it, this seems to imply (semi-)imbalance such as a 4225 or 4135.

Transfer walsh seems so much easier...

[phoenixmj]

fromageGB, on 2019-January-06, 07:43, said:

Thank you all for the elucidation; I said I don't play this. One thing eludes me in this style, and that is how you find a 4-4 major fit when responder has a fairly weak hand with both 4 card majors, if opener rebids 1NT with a balanced sort of hand that may or may not have 4 cards in the other major. Or does opener with a 4333 shape bid 1♣ 1♥ 1♠? On the sound of it, this seems to imply (semi-)imbalance such as a 4225 or 4135.

Transfer walsh seems so much easier...

I am hardly an expert - but I can tell you that in our partnership agreement the bidding would go 1c, 1H, 1S if responder has a 4 card major and does not have the power to reverse (regardless of shape)or has a 4 card heart suit without the shape to bid the diamonds first, and opener has a 4 card major. If responder has 4 spades they would then support. Assumption is that opener does not have 5 spades as we would open a 5 card major, and frankly we also assume that opener does not have 4 hearts as a fit would have been found and opener would support the hearts.

It is my understanding that opener rebids 1NT over a diamond bid even with 4 card majors and balanced hand, but not over a 1M bid. We would take a sequence of 1c, 1H, 1N to deny a 4 card spade suit but it would show a balanced type hand 12-14 points. That is how we play it. Curious to find out if we are not correct.

[Stephen Tu]

When to bypass 1s over 1h response to bid 1nt is a separate issue that's been discussed dozens of times here and other forums. There are very good players all over the spectrum from always bypass to sometimes bypass to never bypass.

[phoenixmj]

Stephen Tu, on 2019-January-06, 10:27, said:

When to bypass 1s over 1h response to bid 1nt is a separate issue that's been discussed dozens of times here and other forums. There are very good players all over the spectrum from always bypass to sometimes bypass to never bypass.

I just googled and found 2 very good discussions on this. This forum is awesome. Will read while on a plane today. Getting information on the ins and outs of a particular convention or bid is really great. A lot of "stuff" you find just talks about the basic system without addressing the problems.

Thanks so much for letting me know this info is out there.


Cheers

This post has been edited by phoenixmj: 2019-January-06, 11:16

[phoenixmj]

Well - i am converted after reading some of the discussion about bypassing spades.

We are now going to bypass and bid one NT. This discussion has been very helpful to us. Thanks.

[bravejason]

It’s a strange thing - so much emphasis on finding a major suit fit and handling major suit fits (Stayman, Jacoby 2NT, et al) and yet the first thing opener does with a 4 card major is conceal it by opening a minor suit and thus force responder to guess what song to sing.

[fromageGB]

bravejason, on 2019-January-16, 16:19, said:

It’s a strange thing - so much emphasis on finding a major suit fit and handling major suit fits (Stayman, Jacoby 2NT, et al) and yet the first thing opener does with a 4 card major is conceal it by opening a minor suit and thus force responder to guess what song to sing.

I don't see anything strange in opening a minor, nor awkward/confusing etc. You do not miss a major because responder will show a 4-card major if he has one, and you will support with a fit. Much more important to distinguish between opener's 4-card and 5-card major, so it seems the right way to me.

The scoring makes it better to be in an 8-card major fit rather than an 8-card minor fit, but bidding methods would be completely different if minor tricks were 30 each, and major tricks 20.