gnasher, on 2013-January-17, 06:11, said:
Do you think you can refute Han's argument by quoting Klinger, out of context and without any accompanying logic?
The usual argument for opening 1♦ with a 1444 shape is that it allows you to rebid clubs without reversing. On this hand we don't intend to make a minimum rebid, so there is no benefit to opening 1♦. For the advantages of opening 1♣, see the part of Han's post that you didn't quote.
I think there are benefits.
You keep the bidding low, which is important when you want to bring all your suits into play no matter how strong you are. 4441 need delicate exploration.
I think starting with 1
♦ and following with 2
♣ gives you the best chance not to loose any of your suits, without showing a 5 card minor.
I believe a reverse should guarantee an anchor suit.
Roth used to argue if I can get past this round (the second round 2
♣), I am well placed.
If partner passes 2
♣ there is no guarantee that this is not the best contract, but I admit if he is weak and specifically 5
♠=4
♥=1
♦=3
♣ I might miss 4
♥.
If partner bids 2
♦ - he will often give false preference if he has not a true one - you can bid 2
♥, if partner bids 2
♥, which is forcing, you can bid 3
♥, which is also forcing and shows your distribution.
If partner bids 2
♠ I would content myself with 2NT, but 3NT is okay too.
Rainer Herrmann