[jtfanclub]

Just wondering if anybody had used a structure like this....

1NT-2♦-2♥-2♠- transfer to clubs, says nothing about hearts.
1NT-2♥-2♠-3♣- transfer to diamonds, says nothing about spades.

I can't remember the last time I used those auctions using something standard.

The two biggest problems look to be that I end up only having one superaccept (1 suit up), and with interference pass has to be 'I'd complete the transfer if I knew your transfer was real'.

The advantage is, of course, that I free up two responses to 1NT.

Anybody use something like this? Anyone?

[gwnn]

A third potentially even bigger problem would be the loss of the two certainly useful rebids of responder's. And a fourth would be GCC legality?

But I think it's a nice idea. I'd certainly like to try it.

[fred]

My regular partners and I play a similar retransfer method. After 1NT-2D-2H:

2S=both minors game force (ie NOT hearts)
2NT=5+ hearts, 4+ clubs, inv or better
3C=5+ hearts, 4+ diamonds, inv or better
3D=strong slam try (or better) with 6+ hearts
3H=inv with 6+ hearts
3S=self-splinter (mild slam try)
3NT=choice of games
4C/D=self-splinter (mild slam tries)
4H=6+ hearts balanced, mild slam try
4S=5332 with 5 clubs, at least invitational to slam

Most of the bids are similar after 1NT-2H-2S.

The downside of this method is that you lose a way to transfer and then bid 2NT, but this is only a problem when you are 5332 (otherwise you can transfer and then retransfer to your 4-card suit).

With 5332 inv we have to choose between one of these options:

1) transfer and Pass
2) transfer and 3NT
3) Stayman and treat as inv with 4-card heart suit
4) 2NT inv (ie ignore hearts completely)

I have been playing this for at least 10 years and since I did not invent it I suspect it has been around a lot longer than that.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[hrothgar]

The Scanian NT structure makes extensive use of second round transfers.

Its a VERY well thought out structure, but I consider it very complex. I found that I needed to invest a lot of time in learning it the structure and practice lots to make sure that it stayed fresh.

GCCC legality isn't an issue. You can play anything you want over a 1NT opening.

(Unlike Fred's structure, the secondary xfers often show a 4 card major and a longer minor)

Here's a typical example. Partner opens 1NT and you hold

♠ 4
♥ KT85
♦ 94
♣ JT8652

You can start with a staymanish 2♣. If partner replies anything other than 2♥ you can bid 2NT as an xfer to Clubs

[fred]

fred, on Mar 7 2007, 12:08 AM, said:

The downside of this method is that you lose a way to transfer and then bid 2NT, but this is only a problem when you are 5332 (otherwise you can transfer and then retransfer to your 4-card suit).

Another downside is you don't have much flexibility with respect to super-accepting a heart transfer (because responder might not have hearts so the bidding gets awkward if opener doesn't leave him enough space).

That doesn't really bother me since I believe that super-accepts (especially descriptive super-accepts) are overrated.

There are lots of upsides.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[awm]

I think one of the big negatives to this kind of structure is opponents who compete over the initial transfer. When opponents are passing it's easy enough to say you have lots of extra bids, but what happens if, for example:

1NT - Pass - 2♦ - 2♠

Now opener can't necessarily bid 3♥ freely with four trumps, and if opener passes responder no longer has so much space to multiplex the various hands. Things get worse the higher opponents bid.

Of course, if the "not hearts" hands in the 2♦ transfer have to be seriously slammish, the opponents aren't that likely to come in when you don't have hearts (and responder tends to have more options if you discuss them) so things work out okay. But I'd be very careful about including "invitational" or weaker hand types without the suit transferred to (which I believe the original poster was suggesting).

[fred]

awm, on Mar 7 2007, 12:39 AM, said:

I think one of the big negatives to this kind of structure is opponents who compete over the initial transfer. When opponents are passing it's easy enough to say you have lots of extra bids, but what happens if, for example:

1NT - Pass - 2♦ - 2♠

Now opener can't necessarily bid 3♥ freely with four trumps, and if opener passes responder no longer has so much space to multiplex the various hands. Things get worse the higher opponents bid.

Of course, if the "not hearts" hands in the 2♦ transfer have to be seriously slammish, the opponents aren't that likely to come in when you don't have hearts (and responder tends to have more options if you discuss them) so things work out okay. But I'd be very careful about including "invitational" or weaker hand types without the suit transferred to (which I believe the original poster was suggesting).

Opener bids 3H in competition just like he normally would.

This is not as scary as it sounds as long as you have good agreements about how responder shows the minors after any possible competitive sequence.

In practice it is rarely an issue because the opponents are rarely dealt enough to cause you a problem. And keep in mind that they won't know that responder has minors (and not hearts) and this will sometimes make it hard for them to come in directly over 2D.

Bottom line is that they don't interfere very often (only twice that I can remember) and, when they do, it is usually easy to survive if your partnership has done the necessary homework.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[glen]

jtfanclub, on Mar 6 2007, 06:45 PM, said:

Just wondering if anybody had used a structure like this....

1NT-2♦-2♥-2♠- transfer to clubs, says nothing about hearts.
1NT-2♥-2♠-3♣- transfer to diamonds, says nothing about spades.

I can't remember the last time I used those auctions using something standard. 

The two biggest problems look to be that I end up only having one superaccept (1 suit up), and with interference pass has to be 'I'd complete the transfer if I knew your transfer was real'. 

The advantage is, of course, that I free up two responses to 1NT.

Anybody use something like this?  Anyone?

First, you don't really "free up two responses to 1NT". You would free up two responses if you played 1NT-3♣/3♦ to play, but almost everybody plays some sort of transfer or MSS etc. scheme, so they have a way of landing in 3 of a minor without making an initial direct response. Since 1NT-2♥--2♠-3♣ as transfer to diamonds, does not free up all the bids after opener rebids 3♦, you are not replicating the sequence 1NT-3♣ as transfer to diamonds, which has all the bids after opener rebids 3♦ to continue to show ♦ hand types.

Second, with minor suit signoffs you want to get to 3 of a minor without letting them have a chance at a double or bid of a major suit on the two level. So both sequences give the opponents chances they might not have otherwise. So this is an additional concern.

Third, I don't know anybody or anyone using something like this, but would not be surprised if there was. Retransfers after the Jacoby transfer have been around for over 30 years (a BW article in the 70s for example). Once retransfers were thought of, somebody would likely have tried putting the minor suit signoffs in this way.

A comment on Fred's approach (and thanks for the details Fred!) - Fred mentions the 5♥ invite. There is also the 5♥+4♠ invite, a tricky hand in many notrump engines. He likely goes via Stayman, but now, if opener rebids 2♦, either he has to bid 2NT, giving up showing the 5♥s, or he has to rebid 2♥, which if it shows invite values, would give up using the 2♥ bid with trashy Stayman.

[Trinidad]

jtfanclub, on Mar 6 2007, 06:45 PM, said:

Just wondering if anybody had used a structure like this....

1NT-2♦-2♥-2♠- transfer to clubs, says nothing about hearts.
1NT-2♥-2♠-3♣- transfer to diamonds, says nothing about spades.

I can't remember the last time I used those auctions using something standard. 

The two biggest problems look to be that I end up only having one superaccept (1 suit up), and with interference pass has to be 'I'd complete the transfer if I knew your transfer was real'. 

The advantage is, of course, that I free up two responses to 1NT.

Anybody use something like this?  Anyone?

These transfers are still in use in Sweden and are called Wohlin transfers. They are named after Jan Wohlin from Stockholm (Sweden). He was European champion in 1952 and 2nd in Bermuda Bowl in 1950 and 1953.

As an aside, Jacoby transfers also originate from Sweden.

Rik

[hotShot]

Take a look at the Tolleson-Transfer Bids.

[glen]

hotShot, on Mar 7 2007, 08:00 AM, said:

Take a look at the Tolleson-Transfer Bids.

Thanks! I thought this was cute:

1NT-2♥ (transfer to either ♠s or ♦s)
-- 2♠-3♣ (transfer to ♦s)
-- 3♦-3♥ (singleton/void in ♥s, game force)
-- 3NT (can not play in 3NT - 3♠ would show can play in 3NT)

[kenrexford]

On a note related to this, years ago, as an systemically-unnecessary part of a canape system, we used a "potentially canape" structure to transfers. For example, 1NT-P-2♦-P-2♥-P-3♣ was an auction showing a weakish hand with 4♥/5+♣. Super-acceptances were fine, as the 4-4 fit was now found and the minor could be kept secret. There were some other systemic tweaks necessary to handle the normal 5-5 GF, of course.

The idea was experimental and fun at the time. Recently, however, it dawned upon me that this idea of "potentially canape" is useful as a technique for responding to third-seat weak notrumps. If you add in a relay, to distinguish 5-5 from 6-4, all major-minor invitationals are handled through the transfer. As you cannot have GF, collapsing these together gains some space that can be used for other issues. Super-accepts are reworked for Opener, to allow definition.

On a completely different note, I also have long felt that something that might be called "minor smolen" would be a simple technique that might be useful. In this technique, a transfer, then a minor, or Stayman, then a minor, shows the other minor, just like with regular smolen. Nothing is gained for the club suit, but bidding one-under diamonds allows half of the major-minor hands to be bid as two-ranger bids. Without minor smolen, 1NT-P-2♥-P-2♠-P-3♦ is probably GF. With minor smolen, you would bid 1NT-P-2♥-P-2♠-P-3♣, giving just enough space to be able to handle invitational and GF. Plus, minors would be right-sided, in theory.

There are many other situations where retransfer theory has gains.

[helene_t]

Many NT structures include some non-heart hands in the 2♦ response. Basically, the idea is that you have a lot of bidding space after 2♦ so that you can put more hands into it than just 5-plus hearts. Hardy used it for hands with a solid suit. Some Dutch experts use it with 4 hearts and a longer minor.

In both cases, though, the hands included are strong. Including weak minor-suit hands is more problematic for the reasons mentioned by others.

[jtfanclub]

hotShot, on Mar 7 2007, 08:00 AM, said:

Take a look at the Tolleson-Transfer Bids.

That looks to be it! Not clear to me if 1NT-2♥-2♠-3♣-3♦ is passable. If it is, you need some sort of super-accept, I would think, since the hand is always of at least invitational strength.

I understand now why the bid cannot be weak. Nothing new under the sun, eh?

[dake50]

Give up Stayman. Start all xfers at 2-level, with rexfer often after accept.

[gwnn]

You just invented Keri

[keylime]

Keri, she's hot.....oops! Mr. Klinger has quite a good NT engine there.....