Development on the 2NT rebid in T-Walsh
#1
Posted 2008-July-02, 06:14
For those who are playing transfer walsh, what are your developments on the 2NT rebid ?
1♣ = all balanced hands excepted those with 5♦
1♣ 1♦ = 4 cards ♥ +
2NT (18-19) ?
1♣ 1♥= 4 cards ♠ +
2NT (18-19) ?
Thanks in advance !
#2
Posted 2008-July-02, 06:18
Does T-Walsh make this sequence functionally different from the standard Walsh 2NT rebid?
-P.J. Painter.
#3
Posted 2008-July-02, 06:24
#4
Posted 2008-July-02, 06:28
1♥ = (1)2-3♥, minimum
1♠ = natural, unbalanced
1N = 17-19 bal, (1)2-3♥
2♣ = Natural
2♦ = Natural, 16+, F1
2♥ = min bal w/4♥, min unbal w/3♥
2N = 16+, 6♣/3♥ OR 5♣/4♥, F1
3♥ = 13-15, unbal w/4♥, suggests concentrated suits + singelton
#5
Posted 2008-July-02, 06:34
2NT rebid shows 18/19 with a balanced hand and it could have a 4-card fit in partners suit. Therefore 2NT is forcing.
With a subminimal hand responder will rebid his suit, the T-walsh pair would re-transfer off course. Only in this sequence you can finish below game level.
With a minimum or stronger hand responder bids 3♣ (checkback), shows another suit (natural) or bids 3/4/6 NT.
Finding your own mistakes is more productive than looking for partner's. It improves your game and is good for your soul. (Nige1)
#6
Posted 2008-July-02, 06:49
helene_t, on Jul 2 2008, 01:24 PM, said:
It's not the case, opener gives strength first (18-19) and can still have 3 cards support....
I suppose that the most effective way is to play a structure with transfers which allows you to play 3M. As I don't want to reinvent the wheel, I'm asking the wonderful people of thsi wonderful forum .....
#7
Posted 2008-July-02, 06:52
kenrexford, on Jul 2 2008, 01:18 PM, said:
Does T-Walsh make this sequence functionally different from the standard Walsh 2NT rebid?
Not really but pay attention that a hands with ♦ longer than ♣ are also opened 1♣ ! (3-4)-4-2, (2-4)-4-3
#8
Posted 2008-July-02, 08:31
1♣ - 1♦ - 2N is now a spade mini-splinter.
This works well.
#9
Posted 2008-July-02, 08:36
kenrexford, on Jul 2 2008, 04:18 AM, said:
Does T-Walsh make this sequence functionally different from the standard Walsh 2NT rebid?
Why yes, yes it does!
There are a few varieties, but a popular one is 1♣ - 1♦ (hearts) - 1♥ simply shows a weak NT type hand (or many minimums).
1♣ - 1♦ - 1N show the 17+ - 19 balanced.
Perhaps the biggest advantage to this method is that you seldom get overboard when responding with very weak hands to 1♣.
Edited: Do any top T-Walsh pairs really play a 2N rebid as 18-19? Even if you play that 1♣-1♦-1♥ shows 3 like the Italians do, they have either a 2♣ or 2♦ opener to show the 18-19 point hands.
#10
Posted 2008-July-02, 08:44
Style 1 (seems common in Northern Europe):
Simple acceptance of transfer shows 3 card support.
Style 2 :
Simple acceptance shows minimum usually balanced hand (may be similar strength in a 4-4-4-1 or 5-4-3-1 hand with shortness in responders suit).
Style 2 would normally rebid 1N to show 17-19 HCP balanced whereas Style 1 would need 1N to show the minimum balanced hand with less than 3 card support.
Since the OP referenced a 2N rebid as showing 18-19, it appears (to me) that Style 1 must be intended.
#11
Posted 2008-July-02, 12:52
- hrothgar
#12
Posted 2008-July-02, 14:45
han, on Jul 2 2008, 01:52 PM, said:
That's my preference, and while I have had limited experience playing T-Walsh, I have yet to see a downside.
We use 2N as the BWS nightmare hand: 1♣ 1♦ 2N shows typically a 6331 or a 6322 with 6 clubs and 3♥s and gf values. It hasn't come up yet, so I can't tell you how well it works in practice
But having the 1N rebid show 17-19 (when played with a 14-16 1NT) or 18-19 has worked very well, especially since, as is very common these days, we strain to respond to 1♣.
#13
Posted 2008-July-02, 16:50
2NT is 18-19 and can have 3-card support.
After 2NT we play transfers.
#14
Posted 2008-July-02, 22:12
But I wanted 2N as a special convention so I played 2D = Genuine Reverse or 18-19 Balanced.
And 2N=FG with Clubs (may have support then) or a Jump to 3C without 3 Card Trump Support and 3C=a Jump to 3C with 3 card Trump Support, can signoff in 3M
Now I think 1M as minimum anything looks better
IF 1N=17-19 and even a 3-3-5-2 shape....so 1D can promise an unbalanced hand
and there is a lot of room to investigate onwards
And I could continue using my 2N/3C scheme.
#15
Posted 2008-July-03, 04:04
pclayton, on Jul 2 2008, 09:36 AM, said:
The Norwegian pair Brogeland-Lindqvist (who won the butler in addition to the European championship in Pau) does, as do the players on Norways Junior and Womens team (the 2 other open pairs don't play T-Walsh). As mentioned by other posters the T-Walsh methods popular in Norway are different from what most posters here use in that a simple acceptance shows 3(4). It seems there is no standard solution to 18-19 hands with 3 cards support, some just accepts the transfer while others (including B-L) rebids 2NT. After the natural 2NT repeated transfers is the most popular method, also used by B-L (I know their system fairly well, since I have played the same methods partnering Lindqvist).
John
#16
Posted 2008-July-03, 05:05
jvage, on Jul 3 2008, 11:04 AM, said:
Hi John!
Repeated transfers are what I'm interested in !
Do you always re-transfer with 5 cards in the major ? If you show a second suit, do you have 5M ?
Could you post the detailed developments ?
#17
Posted 2008-July-03, 05:46
Note 2: Transfers after 2NT rebid
1m – 1y
2NT
• Transfers on 3-level and to both majors on 4-level. No Splinter!
o Transfers to 3♦, always accept
o Transfers to responders suit accept with 2card
o 1♣ - 1♥ - 2NT - 3♦: Opener makes a preference between ♥and ♠, 3♥may be 3 card
o 1♣ - 1♠ - 2NT - 3♠: Both minors, in search for the best game, OR may be stronger
o Jump to 4y for play 4 in that M, while 3y followed by 4 in that M is slamish (1♣ - 1♥ - 4♦ and 1♦ - 1♠ - 2NT - 4♦ is to play with both Majors)
o Jump to 4♣ is Natural slamish
1♥ – 1♠
2NT
• Transfers on 3-level. Minor on 4-level is Splinter with ♠ as trump!
o Transfers to 3♦, always accept
o Transfers to responders suit accept with 2card
o Jump to 4♥ and 4♠ to play, while 3♦/♥, followed by 4♥/♠is slamish
John
#18
Posted 2008-July-03, 06:18
joker_gib, on Jul 3 2008, 06:05 AM, said:
Since this is not explicit in the notes I can try to answer this myself.
Yes, normally.
No, in most sequences you will need to retransfer/rebid the major to show 5. For example after 1♣ - 1♦, 2NT:
3♦ - 3♥ - 3♠ shows 45(+) (system geeks will want to revert the 3♠/NT rebids)
3♥ - 3♠ - 3NT shows 44
I have not discussed with neither Espen L. nor any other partner how minor-suit rebids work, so I am honestly not sure wether say 1♣ - 1♥, 2NT - 3♣, 3♦ (forced) - 3NT could be made with only 44 in ♠/♦ (we always open 1♣ with 44 in the minors) or if it promise 5+ diamonds (I would guess it does). As in regular Walsh, with less than a gameforce responder would normally start by showing 4 spades before a longer minor, but facing a well-fitting 18-19 slam may still be in the picture.
John
#19
Posted 2008-July-03, 10:58
#20
Posted 2008-July-04, 08:19
As a result we have now decided that after 1♣ 1♦ (showing hearts) 2NT, all bids are transfers so that :
3♣ 3♦ 3NT is slam invitational with 5 diamonds
3♦ shows 6 hearts, and
3♥ shows 4+ spades. Responder has not denied holding 5 spades, as our treatment with a less than invitational hand with 5/5 in the majors is to initially show the hearts, so opener treats this in a Walsh-like fashion. He bids 3♠ with a 3 card suit, bids 3NT with 2, and 4♠ with 4. Over 3♠ responder can convert to 3NT or 4♠ accordingly.