[hrothgar]

Anyone ever considered something like the following over the opponent,s mini NT (10-12 HCP)

X = Penalty
2♣ = Transfer to Hearts
2♦ = Transfer to Spades
2♥ = Majors
2♠ = Clubs
2N = Diamonds
3♣ = Minors

The system is (obviously) based on two under transfers.

As a general rule

A super accept (bidding something > than partner's suit) shows good support and useful stuff

Bidding partner's suit says that you don't like the suit (0-1 card support)

Bidding the intermediate suit says that you have tolerance for partner's suit, but aren't particularly excited by it

If partner says that he dislikes your suit, new suits by overcaller are to play

If partner says that he has tolerance for your suit, new suits are game tries

[hrothgar]

Jlall, on Mar 8 2008, 01:54 AM, said:

This seems ok, I just hate 2H for both majors. It is very similar to my usual scheme of 2C=majors and then transfers. You have to decide if the gains you get from being able to play 2 under transfers instead of 1 under for the majors outweigh the losses when you have both majors. I think in general a scheme that involves transfers and the ability to show the majors immediately is best.

Hi Justin

I actually considered an alternative scheme using 2♣ for the majors and one under transfers. I think it has some real advantages. In particular, its nice to be able to advance with 2♦ to ask overcaller to express a preference.

Equally significant, you can construct some nice invitational sequences.

Balanced against this, the immediate 2♥ bid puts the other side under a lot more more pressure which I always like).

I like the 2 under transfers because you're immediately able to extract information about a misfit which can be quite useful.

[rogerclee]

I like Mohan, which uses 2♣ majors and 2♦/2♥ transfers.

[hrothgar]

Jlall, on Mar 8 2008, 02:08 AM, said:

hrothgar, on Mar 7 2008, 06:06 PM, said:

Jlall, on Mar 8 2008, 01:54 AM, said:

This seems ok, I just hate 2H for both majors. It is very similar to my usual scheme of 2C=majors and then transfers. You have to decide if the gains you get from being able to play 2 under transfers instead of 1 under for the majors outweigh the losses when you have both majors. I think in general a scheme that involves transfers and the ability to show the majors immediately is best.

Hi Justin

I actually considered an alternative scheme using 2♣ for the majors and one under transfers. I think it has some real advantages. In particular, its nice to be able to advance with 2♦ to ask overcaller to express a preference.

Equally significant, you can construct some nice invitational sequences.

Balanced against this, the immediate 2♥ bid puts the other side under a lot more more pressure which I always like).

I like the 2 under transfers because you're immediately able to extract information about a misfit which can be quite useful.

I agree with all of this, I just think that being able to have 2D to ask for partners preference (and start 3 card invites, or however you prefer to play it) is so huge that I prefer it.

I think putting them under pressure is less of a concern since constructive bidding is so tough after a mini NT since they killed a whole level already, so I'm not too worried about that part.

If you prioritize things differently then your scheme is fine, and I like it.

Thanks for the recommendations

We'll give your scheme a try. I'll let folks know how it works out