[jillybean]

Dealer: West Vul: NS Scoring: IMP

♠ AJ6 ♥ K87643 ♦ K3 ♣ Q3

West North East South

 Pass  1NT   Pass  2♦
 Pass  2♥    Pass  4♥
 Pass  Pass  Pass  


Hi, here's a hand I was playing with Richard. SAYC, Texas transfers.
How can we investigate slam here?

tyia
jb

[1eyedjack]

Personally I wouldn't (investigate), unless partner refused the transfer.

Having said that, I can construct hands where partner has only 3 (good) trump support, and a source of tricks in a side suit (hopefully Clubs), where slam is good.

So perhaps I should.

You would normally have a method of showing a single-suited GF hand below game (with by inference some slam interest), so perhaps we need to lower the bottom range of that sequence a bit to include hands like this.

Precisely HOW you show a single suited slam try is a question that only you can answer. It will be tucked away somewhere in your 1NT response notes, which tend to be self-contained and modular methods that require a particular sequence, and will not be standard worldwide.

For a simple example, if 1N-2D-2H-3H is invitational you could use 1N-3H to show a single-suited slam try. Or you could reverse those meanings if you felt good cause.

[plaur]

jillybean2, on Sep 30 2006, 11:43 AM, said:

Hi, here's a hand I was playing with Richard. SAYC, Texas transfers.
How can we investigate slam here?

Playing Texas, you have made a mild slaminvite. Is the hand worth more than that? I think not.

[jillybean]

Ah yeap, Richard said that at the time,, took a while to sink in.

[1eyedjack]

I would not be happy playing a method that requires me to resolve a single-suited slam try (however mild) at the level of 4H.

The problem with (particularly mild) slam tries is that for slam to be good, especially opposite a limited partner, it requires partner not only to be maximum but to have a PARTICULAR maximum. Positioning of values etc assume critical importance. While it might not be relevant on this specific hand, I think it is often the case that 6 could be good if the hand is suitable, and yet 5 could be at risk if the hand is unsuitable. Partner may be poorly placed to decide whether the hand is suitable if you bid 4H to show a mild slam try but without any further qualification.

[plaur]

1eyedjack, on Sep 30 2006, 03:14 PM, said:

I would not be happy playing a method that requires me to resolve a single-suited slam try (however mild) at the level of 4H.

This is the BI forum and the OP said SAYC. With Texas you have three ways to show your 6-suiter . Thats a nice improvement over basic SAYC.
1) 1NT - 2♦ - 2♥ - 4♥ mild slaminvite
2) 1NT - 3♥ slam interest
3) 1NT - 4♦ - 4♥ - (pass or blackwood)
and if you play cuebids a fourth
4) 1NT - 2♦ - 2♥ - jump new suit as cuebid

Thats all plenty for me and my partner! The real problem is evaluating which hands should use a,b,c or d:

[1eyedjack]

Where to begin? Spoiled for choice.

There are two issues:
(1) what methods should you adopt and
(2) what should you bid on this hand in the context of those methods.

We are in complete agreement that if transfer then 4H shows a mild slam try and is the only way to make that statement then that answers issue (2). There is no choice but to use that treatment and hope that it works out OK.

Whether the OP was playing Texas Transfers or not is a question of fact, and I gather from her second post that they were. In that context, therefore, it is settled that transfer then 4H was the correct approach on the hand.

My second post in this thread considered only issue (1). You took exception to my post on three grounds:
A_) That the system in place is SAYC
B_) That the post is in the BI forum, and
C_) That my post was logically flawed (specifically, that the methods in place are adequate, contrary to my belief)

My notes on SAYC do not include Texas Transfers.
http://www.d21acbl.com/References/Conventi...arch=%22SAYC%22
or here
http://web2.acbl.org/documentlibrary/play/...gle%20pages.pdf

That is not to say that anyone playing SAYC is prohibited from using Texas Transfers, and especially not prohibited when playing an SAYC-based system in an event over which the ACBL holds no jurisdiction.

However, if variations to SAYC are fair game, then your comment that my objection was inappropriate on grounds (A) seem to lack coherence, particularly as my suggestion was more closely aligned to SAYC as published.

Your comment that this is the BI forum is also something of a 2-edged sword. If I read you correctly, the BI status should argue for the use of simple methods, and yet you suggest no fewer than 4 subtly different methods of showing a single suited slam try in response to 1NT. To me there seems to be a contradiction in there somewhere.

Lastly, you do not appear to have addressed my final point in the previous post at all. My original objection to the method espoused is that a mild slam try, expressed in the form of a transfer followed by 4H is a risky and uncertain route. Opener is ill informed whether to proceed without risking going minus at the 5 level. In response to that point you advise that there are 4 ways of showing a slam try and so my fears must be unfounded. And yet the precise hand that gives rise to my concern is the one that is recommended to transfer then 4H, and the other three "routes" cater for other hand types. You could have 16 different methods of showing a slam try, and as long as the mild single-suited slam try is lumped into the transfer then 4H, you will end up with the same problem: Highly accurate slam bidding on all the other hands, but the risk remains on the one route in question.

Personally I would recommend to a BIL player, especially if the remaining SAYC methods are to be adopted, ditch the Texas bit. Transfer then jump shift on a splinter, that I think they can cope with. Otherwise 1N-3H on a single suited slam try (however mild) with no shortage. There is loads of space then below 4H for both parties to clarify how excited they are in context. The method has the combined benefit of being simpler, more accurate and less risky. And if you are happy to build in more complexity, such as a "serious 3N" there is plenty of scope for that as well, as the auction is less preemptive on your own side.

[hrothgar]

1eyedjack, on Oct 1 2006, 01:49 AM, said:

Personally I would recommend to a BIL player, especially if the remaining SAYC methods are to be adopted, ditch the Texas bit. Transfer then jump shift on a splinter, that I think they can cope with. Otherwise 1N-3H on a single suited slam try (however mild) with no shortage.

Silly question: I've read over a LOT of different response structures over NT openings.

I'm not familiar with any modern methods that use 1N - 3M as a single suited slam try. I really don't think that it makes sense to recommend/teach methods that are this far out of the mainstream.

[HeartA]

jillybean2, on Sep 30 2006, 11:43 AM, said:

Dealer: West Vul: NS Scoring: IMP

♠ AJ6 ♥ K87643 ♦ K3 ♣ Q3

West North East South

 Pass  1NT   Pass  2♦
 Pass  2♥    Pass  4♥
 Pass  Pass  Pass  


Hi, here's a hand I was playing with Richard. SAYC, Texas transfers.
How can we investigate slam here?

tyia
jb

certainly I would try slam. With combined HCP around 30 and a fit, I would always do that.

[jillybean]

HeartA, on Sep 30 2006, 06:04 PM, said:

certainly I would try slam. With combined HCP around 30 and a fit, I would always do that.

Sure, but how?

[pbleighton]

"Playing Texas, you have made a mild slaminvite. Is the hand worth more than that? I think not."

I agree.

You have a combined 28-30 hcp, no singletons or voids in either hand, and a bad suit.

JB, your bidding was just fine - well, it was what I would have done, which may or may not be the same thing

Peter

[neilkaz]

pbleighton, on Sep 30 2006, 09:17 PM, said:

"Playing Texas, you have made a mild slaminvite. Is the hand worth more than that? I think not."

I agree.

You have a combined 28-30 hcp, no singletons or voids in either hand, and a bad suit.

JB, your bidding was just fine - well, it was what I would have done, which may or may not be the same thing

Peter

We agree. If opener has 3 card ♥ support you'll often need a 22 split to have play for a slam opposite 15-17 HCP since if your missing a side ace, a trump loser is fatal.

I bid the hand just like jb did.

However, many times this Jacoby Transfer mild slam invite misses a slam as opener is afraid to carry on past 4M. Once in a while opener continues and 5M is set.

IMHO, some method to invite slam below game is preferable. Perhaps a two-way GF/mild slam invite 3♣ bid could be used ?!?

.. neilkaz ..

[HeartA]

jillybean2, on Sep 30 2006, 08:21 PM, said:

Sure, but how?

With 6th's Heart, facing a 1NT opener, your play strength is about slam. Depending on the system you play, you could bid 2S/3S to show slam interest and see how pard responds.

[jocdelevat]

same question as jb. I red her post before and still don't know how to bid? I chicken out but lucki nonone made it.

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 Pass  1NT   Pass  2♥
 Pass  2♠    Pass  4♠
 Pass  Pass  Pass  

best regards
jocdelevat

[the hog]

HeartA, on Oct 1 2006, 11:04 AM, said:

jillybean2, on Sep 30 2006, 11:43 AM, said:

Dealer: West Vul: NS Scoring: IMP

♠ AJ6 ♥ K87643 ♦ K3 ♣ Q3

West  North East  South

 Pass  1NT   Pass  2♦
 Pass  2♥    Pass  4♥
 Pass  Pass  Pass  


Hi, here's a hand I was playing with Richard. SAYC, Texas transfers.
How can we investigate slam here?

tyia
jb

certainly I would try slam. With combined HCP around 30 and a fit, I would always do that.

I am sorry but this is a totally weird comment. How do you know that you have better than a 6-2 fit. Partner did not super accept, or do anything else to show a maximum.

The sequence Jilly produced is a mild slam try. You have a clear pass now.

[1eyedjack]

hrothgar, on Oct 1 2006, 12:09 AM, said:

Silly question:  I've read over a LOT of different response structures over NT openings. 

I'm not familiar with any modern methods that use 1N - 3M as a single suited slam try.  I really don't think that it makes sense to recommend/teach methods that are this far out of the mainstream.

Standard SAYC uses 1N-3M as a single-suited slam try.
I provided 2 links, one to the 2003 booklet and one to the 2006 (revised) booklet. Both agree on this. This is also repeated in the online "Learn To Play Bridge" facility on BBO (Explore Bridge/Learn to play bridge/Volume2 - Bidding - Responding to 1NT and 2NT revisited). The method is also integral to Bridge Base Basic system (Explore Bridge/Bridge Base Standard/Basic)

Here is also a link to Standard English (November 2005 version) which, at least in respect of Major suits, is also consistent with this interpretation (para 1.1.7, page 6)
http://66.102.9.104/custom?q=cache:hV118yN...en&ct=clnk&cd=2

I think that it makes sense to recommend/teach methods that are so far in the middle of the mainstream that the banks of the river are out of sight.

[kgr]

neilkaz, on Oct 1 2006, 05:54 AM, said:

However, many times this Jacoby Transfer mild slam invite misses a slam as opener is afraid to carry on past 4M. Once in a while opener continues and 5M is set.

I agree.
Should opener ever go one? Or is responder verifying that opener can super-accept and only wants to go on to slem in that case?
When do you expect opener not to super-accept and go on after the 4M bid?
Seems like jocdelevat 's example (max, 3-card fit, but no super accept) would qualify. But then how to stop below slem?

[mike777]

jillybean2, on Sep 30 2006, 08:21 PM, said:

HeartA, on Sep 30 2006, 06:04 PM, said:

certainly I would try slam.  With combined HCP around 30 and a fit, I would always do that.

Sure, but how?

Well let's see what we told our partner by our tfr and jump to 4H.
1) mild slam try
2) 6+hearts
3) no decent second suit
4) no splinter.
5) partner told us no super accept hand.


One thing you might want to discuss with Richard is given all of the above what does a minimum/maximum responder hand look like on this auction? Mild slam try can mean quite a lot of things to us int. range players.