[hrothgar]

MSOCITO uses 2 under transfers after a 1S opening

1♠ - 2♣ shows 5+ Hearts
1♠ - 2♦ shows 5+ Spades

I never really posted any detailed discussion about followup after the transfer responses. I figured that it might be useful to get some discussion going starting with the auction 1♠ - 2♦.

Couple quick comments about what type of hands are suitable for a transfer. I believe that the transfers are best used with relatively weak hands that are seaking to improve the contract. On occasion, responder might hold game invitational values. If so, his main concern will be to discover whether the partnership has a Spade fit. (Note, with game invitational values and a self sufficient suit, responder should advance 3♠ immediately to focus responder's attention on first/second round controls.)

Here are a few representative hands where responder might consider a 2♦ bid:

♠ KQT752
♥ K432
♦ x
♣ xx

Responder plans to signoff in Spades, but might consider game if opener shows support and a max

♠ QJT9653
♥ 842
♦ x
♣ xx

Responder is aiming for a part score in Spades and doesn't feel like passing 1♠

♠ KQT75
♥ xxx
♦ A753
♣ x

Responder will explore game if opener shows support. If the partership doesn't have a double fit, they will rest comfortably in 3♦

♠ KQT75
♥ xxx
♦ xxxx
♣ x

Responder is looking for the best part score.
--------------------

Here are opener's rebids after 1♠ - 2♦

The basic scheme is that super accepts show Spade support and a maximum

Completing the transfer denies Spade tolerance: Opener has at most a singleton and might have a void. Responder has the option of passing. Follow-up bids are designed to scramble to a decent contract.

Step shows 2-3 Spades. If opener has 3 Spades, he's sitting on a minimum.

-------------------
Hand type 1

Responder shows a super-accepts

3♠ = 4 card spade support (Opener is promising a 6-4)
3♥ = 3 card support, stiff Heart, primary Diamonds
3♦ = 3 card support, stiff Club, primary Diamonds
3♣ = 3 card support, maximum values, flat hand (3262 or some such)
2N = 3 card support, maximum values, both minors

Hand type 2:

Opener rebids 2♠, denying Spade tolerance

3♦ = To play
3♣ = Tolerance for both minors, club preference
2N = No preference between the minors
Pass = willing to play 2♠ opposite a stiff

Hand type 3:

Opener rebids 2♥, showing 2-3 Spades

3♦ = to play
3♣ = Maximum response, 5+ Spades, 4 Diamonds, short Clubs
3♦ = Maximum reponse, 5+ Spades, 4 Diamonds, short Hearts
2♠ = to play

[akhare]

Hi Richard,

For what it's worth we liked the idea so much that we ended up adopting it a while ago. We just had a discussion the other about what type of hands would rather relay first (using 1N) as opposed to using 2♣/2♦ to show ♥/♠. We concluded that they are likely distributional hands that wouldn't do too well at the 3 level opposite a misfit.

As I see it opener needs to show the following types of hands (this is just off the top of my head):

1) Maximum hands w/ only ♦s, but no fit (likely 3N candidate)
2) Maximum hands w/ both minors, but no fit (might have a 5m/3N contract)
3) Minimum hands w/ ♦s or both minors and no fit
4) Maximum hands w/ ♦s and good fit
5) All other minimum hands w/ fit

As I see it, 1) and 2) might be solved by the simple expedient of bidding 3♣/3♦. The really problematic sequence might be 3) -- for instance, over 1♠ - 2♣ (showing ♥s), does opener show the weak hand w/ both minors by making the paradox response 2♥?

However, if we choose that option, what is opener supposed to do w/ 5) after the same sequence? The 3 level might be too high, but I suppose the playing strength should compensate for it. After all, responder's hand must be stronger than a direct 2♥ and a really bad hand w/ ♠ can simply pass the 1♠ opening...

[hrothgar]

akhare, on Oct 8 2006, 09:22 PM, said:

Hi Richard,

For what it's worth we liked the idea so much that we ended up adopting it a while ago. We just had a discussion the other about what type of hands would rather relay first (using 1N) as opposed to using 2♣/2♦ to show ♥/♠. We concluded that they are likely distributional hands that wouldn't do too well at the 3 level opposite a misfit.

As I see it opener needs to show the following types of hands (this is just off the top of my head):

1) Maximum hands w/ only ♦s, but no fit (likely 3N candidate)
2) Maximum hands w/ both minors, but no fit (might have a 5m/3N contract)
3) Minimum hands w/ ♦s or both minors and no fit
4) Maximum hands w/ ♦s and good fit
5) All other minimum hands w/ fit

As I see it, 1) and 2) might be solved by the simple expedient of bidding 3♣/3♦. The really problematic sequence might be 3) -- for instance, over 1♠ - 2♣ (showing ♥s), does opener show the weak hand w/ both minors by making the paradox response 2♥?

However, if we choose that option, what is opener supposed to do w/ 5) after the same sequence? The 3 level might be too high, but I suppose the playing strength should compensate for it. After all, responder's hand must be stronger than a direct 2♥ and a really bad hand w/ ♠ can simply pass the 1♠ opening...

What makes this complicated is that there are two different issues that need to be resolved simultaneously:

1. What type of hands should bid 2♦ over a 1♠ opening
2. What type of rebid structure should opener use after a 1♠ advance

Personally, I still prefer schemes in which most hands with game invitation values or better start with the 1NT relay. Accordingly, the response structure that I suggested over the 2♦ advance doesn't really focus much on opener showing minors and aiming for 3N or 5m. You don't need to differentiate between minimum misfits and maximum misfits because you won't have values for game in most cases.

In theory, I suppose that it would be possible to compress all the super-accepts sequences into (Major +1) such that

1♠ - 2♦ - 2NT = Any maximum with 3 card Spade support and shortage

This would permit

1♠ - 2♦ - 3♣ = Maximum hand, no Spade tolerance, good Clubs
1♠ - 2♦ - 3♦ = Maximum hand, no Spade tolerance, good Diamonds
1S - 2♦ - 3♥ = Maximum hand, 3 card Spade support, no shortage

[hrothgar]

hrothgar, on Oct 8 2006, 09:34 PM, said:

In theory, I suppose that it would be possible to compress all the super-accepts sequences into (Major +1) such that

1♠ - 2♦ - 2NT = Any maximum with 3 card Spade support and shortage

This would permit

1♠ - 2♦ - 3♣ = Maximum hand, no Spade tolerance, good Clubs
1♠ - 2♦ - 3♦ = Maximum hand, no Spade tolerance, good Diamonds
1S - 2♦ - 3♥ = Maximum hand, 3 card Spade support, no shortage

I just ran some sims testing the revised response scehdule.

The natural 3♣ / 3♦ responses look like a winner.... In particular, offloading these hand types out of the 1S - 2D - 2S auctions really seems to improve the scrambling auctions.

Thanks for the suggestion

[hrothgar]

I had the chance to talk to Paul Marston on this topic. He thinks that its important to be able to show 5-5 patterns with both minors. He also thinks that its dangerous to super accept with flat hand patterns (6322s and 7222s)

After 1S - 2C (showing 5+ Hearts)

3S = 3-4 Spades, Low shortage (0-1 Clubs)
3H = 3-4 Spades, High shortage (0-1 Hearts)
3D = No Spade tolerance, self sufficient Diamonds
3C = No Spade tolerance, self sufficient Clubs
2N = 5-5 in the minors, no Spade tolerance
2S = 0-1 Spades, not suitable for another bid
2H = 2-3 Spades, not suitable for another bid

After 1S - 2C

3H = 4 Hearts
3D = No Heart tolerance, self sufficient Diamonds
3C = No Hearts tolerance, self sufficient Clubs
2N = 5-5 in the minors, no Spade tolerance
2S = 3 Card Heart support with side shortage
2H = 0-1 Hearts, not suitable for another bid
2D = 2-3 hearts, not suitable for another bid

[akhare]

hrothgar, on Oct 8 2006, 09:07 PM, said:

After 1S - 2C (showing 5+ Hearts)

3S = 3-4 Spades, Low shortage (0-1 Clubs)
3H = 3-4 Spades, High shortage (0-1 Hearts)
3D = No Spade tolerance, self sufficient Diamonds
3C = No Spade tolerance, self sufficient Clubs
2N = 5-5 in the minors, no Spade tolerance
2S = 0-1 Spades, not suitable for another bid
2H = 2-3 Spades, not suitable for another bid

After 1S - 2C

3H = 4 Hearts
3D = No Heart tolerance, self sufficient Diamonds
3C = No Hearts tolerance, self sufficient Clubs
2N = 5-5 in the minors, no Spade tolerance
2S = 3 Card Heart support with side shortage
2H = 0-1 Hearts, not suitable for another bid
2D = 2-3 hearts, not suitable for another bid

I think you meant 1S - 2D (showing 5+ Spades) in the first case.

I suppose you lose the ability to show moderate hands w/ ♦s and might risk playing in 2♥/2♠ opposite a singleton or void. Does this imply that responder should almost always have a good 6 card suit or a secondary ♦ fit to bid 2♣/2♦?