[fourdad]

Conventions such as Michaels and unusual NT were invented based on the playing power of 5-5 hands.

To limit this hand to HCP runs against that premise.

I would value it as playing points and make an easy 1♠ bid.

[fourdad]

Conventions such as Michaels and Unusual NT were invented based on the playing power of 5-5 hands.

This premise should not be ignored just because one happens to be responder rather than overcaller.

I would value this as 7 playing points and make an EASY 1♠ bid

[fourdad]

 fourdad, on 2015-November-27, 07:03, said:

Conventions such as Michaels and Unusual NT were invented based on the playing power of 5-5 hands.

This premise should not be ignored just because one happens to be responder rather than overcaller.

I would value this as 7 playing points and make an EASY 1♠ bid

sorry for the double post...i cannot type worth a damn.

[fourdad]

Easy 1♠ bid

[aguahombre]

 fourdad, on 2015-November-27, 07:05, said:

sorry for the double post...i cannot type worth a damn.

Funny. You apologize for a double post by making it a triple.

[m1cha]

 lycier, on 2015-November-26, 05:21, said:

Imp , White Vs Red

---

This one is easy: If you have a fit, your hand is strong and you should bid. If you don't have a fit, your hand is weak and you should pass.

On a more serious note, just think of what will happen if you bid or if you pass. Certainly you don't want to miss a ♠ fit. But if you bid now, partner's most likely rebids are ♥s, ♣s and NT. You don't like any of these and you may not be able to make another bid because that would probably be forcing or misdescibe your hand even more.

If you pass with this hand, it is unlikely to be passed around. So you can bid in the next round and partner will understand your hand. For example, if opponents bid ♥, you may be able to bid 2NT (Unusual NT, what else?). If this ends up with the opponents bidding 5♥, opener will know what is good for your axis.

If the ♦s and the ♠s were reversed, it would be a very different matter. I would bid ♠ in the first round rebidding if necessary to show a 6-card suit with few HCPs. The ♦s suit would probably be lost, but who cares?

[fourdad]

 aguahombre, on 2015-November-27, 09:43, said:

Funny. You apologize for a double post by making it a triple.

I am an idiot!! LOL!

[rmnka447]

So how happy will partner be if partner holds a 4=4=2=3 and ends up playing 1 ♣?

I'll bid 1 ♠ and pass the next round unless forced to bid again.

But part of this is knowing if partner jumps to 2 NT, I'd have Wolff to get us out of the auction at 3 D.

[jodepp]

If playing a Walsh-style system, you respond 1S almost with impunity. Responder's secondary jump to 3D shows a hand like the thread hand.

[m1cha]

 rmnka447, on 2015-November-27, 13:54, said:

So how happy will partner be if partner holds a 4=4=2=3 and ends up playing 1 ♣?

Sometimes very happy because N1♣-4 undoubled beats W4♥=.

[miamijd]

You can pass or you can bid 1s. Neither is sinful, and either one could work out.

Personally, I would bid 1s on this hand, because if you don't, the opponents are likely to find a heart fit, and the next time you get a chance to bid, the auction could be at the 3 or 4 level.

Could a 1s bid work out poorly? Sure. If partner has a strong 2416 hand or something similar, your side will end up overboard, maybe badly overboard, and maybe doubled. But on balance the potential gains ought to greatly outweigh the potential losses.

As for "trust," you are expected to use your judgment in the bidding, not to slavishly follow rules like a GIB bot.

Happy playing,
Mike

[vmsmith]

In "All Natural Bidding" first published in 1936 a response of 1N is a must.
S Garton Churchill self published two books on bridge without conventions. He was a genius who is little known.

[Vampyr]

 jodepp, on 2015-November-27, 16:05, said:

If playing a Walsh-style system, you respond 1S almost with impunity. Responder's secondary jump to 3D shows a hand like the thread hand.

This method seems to get pretty high on a potential misfit, and dangerous if partner's 1NT rebid is a weak NT. And if partner's rebid is 2♣ passing seems best.

[nullve]

If I respond 1♦, maybe the worst that can happen is that partner rebids 2N. Of course, if I have something like Wolff Adjunct or transfers available, or if 3♦ is NF, there will be no problem, so let's assume all bids except 3♣ are natural and forcing. Then I'm still fine (at least compared to going a couple off in 1♣) if I can somehow manage to elicit 3♠, 4♦ or even 4♠, from partner, bids that I intend to pass. But how do I do that? Well, the opponents' silence suggests that partner has 4 hearts, so I think there's a very good chance he will cuebid 3♠ if I bid 3♥(!), ostensibly showing 4+ hearts. In the unfortunate event that he bids 3N instead, denying 4 hearts, maybe my best chance is to follow up with 4♥(!), showing 12+, 5+H6+D, intending to pass if partner cuebids 4♠ to unambiguously set hearts as trumps.

[jodepp]

 Vampyr, on 2015-November-28, 04:09, said:

This method seems to get pretty high on a potential misfit, and dangerous if partner's 1NT rebid is a weak NT. And if partner's rebid is 2♣ passing seems best.

No question that can happen, but if opener responds 1NT or 2NT you 'know' you have a diamond fit so the danger isn't as bad as it first appears (this is assuming you can get to 3♦ via a Wolff signoff over 2NT). It also sends the message 'stop bidding' when opener reverses into 2♥ (presumably you can lebensohl into 3♦).

[all loomis]

 lycier, on 2015-November-26, 05:21, said:

Imp , White Vs Red

---

It is often said to believe the partner,however as a partner,sometimes you might not be honest.
This is a classic hand.
After opening 1♣,your responding 1♠ should promise 5+hcp,if you really respond and once you get a bad result ,I am afraid you maybe lose your partner's trust from now on.
However,if you honestly passing,and once you lose the game,I am afraid your partner might think you are a silly precisian and also lost partner's trust.
Now,how to make choice? How do you think of it?

start by playing a 1c forcing system. precision is good enough.

[1eyedjack]

 all loomis, on 2015-December-03, 00:41, said:

start by playing a 1c forcing system. precision is good enough.

yes, and all your problems are solved when the auction comes back at you at the 3 level by the opponents.

[aguahombre]

 all loomis, on 2015-December-03, 00:41, said:

start by playing a 1c forcing system. precision is good enough.

This has very little to do with anything. True, you wouldn't end in 1♣; but that was not going to happen anyway -- but if it did, it might not even be bad.

Come to think of it, yeah...let's change our whole system so on this hand we can pass a 1♦ opening that others would open 1♣.

[Charlie Yu]

 rmnka447, on 2015-November-27, 13:54, said:

So how happy will partner be if partner holds a 4=4=2=3 and ends up playing 1 ♣?

I'll bid 1 ♠ and pass the next round unless forced to bid again.

But part of this is knowing if partner jumps to 2 NT, I'd have Wolff to get us out of the auction at 3 D.

Opponents are going to balance most of time. Bidding often leads to partner bidding the impossible game.

[all loomis]

briggida has blessed you with an easy answer: 1d. then 1s over 1h.

but there is nothing wrong with p. 4th chair may rescue, or pd may have 6 c tricks.