[jillybean]

mike777, on 2026-October-19, 07:11, said:

Please note playing Walsh style rather than up the line
Responder with 5D and 4 spades could start with 1D then simply raise one spade to two spades as gf.

Agree on this hand I would start with one spade since only 4D.

Funny enough that means 2H here denied 4S
Playing Walsh, which I would assume

I am not playing walsh here. RMFP

Am I the only forum member having these potential train-wreck auctions? Do the rest of you have agreements as detailed and well defined as world-class players do, or do your partners always make the correct bid?

[mike777]

On the given auction I doubt I would get to 7

[mike777]

 jillybean, on 2026-October-19, 07:14, said:

I am not playing walsh here

Baring any discussion, and none here on OP
I would assume Walsh
Anyway I would not get to 7 on your auction

We certainly would not have discussed exclusion or the follow up bidding

[mw64ahw]

jillybean, on 2026-October-19, 07:14, said:

I am not playing walsh here. RMFP

Am I the only forum member having these potential train-wreck auctions? Do the rest of you have agreements as detailed and well defined as world-class players do, or do your partners always make the correct bid?

We all do - had one the other day when a partner made a 2/1 bid with 9 hcp with the hand on the cusp of a weak2/opening bid. I eventually made the slam try and we got too high in 5, when only 4 was makeable. 12% was a bottom as partner then went down 2.
I'm now trying to persuade them to play Ambra style with 2♦ being a max. weak 2♥ or 5+♥ 10+hcp

[pescetom]

 jillybean, on 2026-October-19, 07:14, said:

Am I the only forum member having these potential train-wreck auctions? Do the rest of you have agreements as detailed and well defined as world-class players do, or do your partners always make the correct bid?

I for one have plenty of train wreck auctions, both with human partners and robot. I like agreements with humans to be based on well documented methods with any competition variations as simple as possible, which is a good way of avoiding misunderstandings even if not technically optimal.
In the case of XYZ we play that it is on in competition if neither of us passed after 1X and we still have 2♣ available. Certainly not ideal, but probably better than dropping our pants just because a passed hand opponent found a bid of the other major.

[DavidKok]

I'm just glad nobody jumped on a strong auction.

[mike777]

Just think if the auction started
1C-1S
3H!-?

Now opener has shown long clubs, four spades, short hearts!

Responder with extras can start to control bid.

This really should be basic in 2/1..

[akwoo]

mikeh, on 2026-October-18, 23:05, said:

To paraphrase Sabine Auken, in a different context, if I were asked by an opp what 4S meant, I’d say ‘it means he wants out of this partnership’. Which I’d be delighted to accept.

Mikeh is almost always playing to do well, or to learn to do better.

Most of the rest of us, and I suspect jillybean in this case, is playing with this particular partner in part for different reasons.

I play in the weekly club game in town to help keep the club alive and to socialize with folks. My regular partner in this game is someone I would never play a serious game with. He appreciates playing with someone competent but isn't particularly interested in playing a serious game, so that's fine.

As a comment on this hand, I think the 4S bid is so ridiculous that jillybean should not be somehow trying to figure out the best bid opposite that. Whatever guess you make is reasonable. Nor should you expect a good game with this partner.

[WasWinM]

mike777, on 2026-October-19, 07:11, said:

Please note playing Walsh style rather than up the line
Responder with 5D and 4 spades could start with 1D then simply raise one spade to two spades as gf.

Agree on this hand I would start with one spade since only 4D.

Funny enough that means 2H here denied 4S
Playing Walsh, which I would assume

If you go back to the origin that Richard Walsh suggested, all American bidding was up the line. Walsh hit upon the idea that weak hand bidding should bid the major first. Bidding up the line was reserved (at that time) for hands of around 12 hcp or more (as opener almost always had 13, and in that up the line method a 1D bid promised no more than 4 diamonds.

[jillybean]

WasWinM, on 2026-October-19, 18:31, said:

If you go back to the origin that Richard Walsh suggested, all American bidding was up the line. Walsh hit upon the idea that weak hand bidding should bid the major first. Bidding up the line was reserved (at that time) for hands of around 12 hcp or more (as opener almost always had 13, and in that up the line method a 1D bid promised no more than 4 diamonds.

As long as partner knows what you are doing, I don't see a problem with 1D

Alex, it's a long story, this partner is very good but has some unique ideas. I am not having much luck finding players who bid like bbf'ers.

[WasWinM]

jillybean, on 2026-October-19, 19:06, said:

As long as partner knows what you are doing, I don't see a problem with 1D

Alex, it's a long story, this partner is very good but has some unique ideas. I am not having much luck finding players who bid like bbf'ers.

No, not at all. An interesting side note to the original Walsh suggestion is that it could go 1c-1d-1s-2s and you'd have been in a game forcing auction and it wouldn't necessarily show longer diamonds.

[akwoo]

jillybean, on 2026-October-19, 19:06, said:

Alex, it's a long story, this partner is very good but has some unique ideas. I am not having much luck finding players who bid like bbf'ers.

A problem in this forum is that we don't really know what "very good" really means. As in I doubt mikeh would consider them very good. I kind of doubt I would consider them very good, but it's possible.

[jillybean]

Very good may be an overbid, but it is all relative.

The Walsh System is also known as Western Roth-Stone, West Coast Scientific and Western Scientific. Reference: Francis, Henry G.; Truscott, Alan F.; Francis, Dorthy A., eds. (2001). The Official Encyclopedia of Bridge (6th ed.). Memphis, TN

[awm]

These happen more often in unpracticed partnerships of course. Here's a recent one for me:

(1♣) - Pass - (1NT) - Dbl
(Pass) - 2♣*

* Intended as "pick a major"; interpreted as natural. 2♣ was passed out and the 4-1 fit was not a success.