[OleBerg]

Fluffy, on Feb 28 2009, 02:59 AM, said:

OleBerg, your transfer again system has an important flaw IMO: One of the advantages of the transfer walsh is that opener plays most hands, by transfering back you are putting most of the plays on responder (more than the ones he would play on a normal system with when he is weak).

That is a price you might be willing to pay, I don't know if its worth it because I never tried your way. When I am stuck for a bid when I am strong I just blast 2NT and think later .

It doesn't happen that often.

When you transfer back to your opening suit, you have already bid the suit once. And most the times responder doesn't complete the transfer, we have gadgets to get the contract rightsided.

Also, on many game deals, the opener need not be the strong hand.

Quick example:

1♣ - 1♥
1♠ ("Transfer to NT, 15-19")

Now:

3♠ = Transfer to 3NT.
3NT = To play.

So in this particular sequence, we will rightside more often than others. (Assuming we are able to evaluate our hands.)

It is not that uncommon, that when bidding or inviting game, the first time the suit is actually bid, is the final contract. And we have had the option of making of making either hand declarer.

The "wrongsiding" often happens at low levels, where it is not that important.

[FrancesHinden]

I strongly prefer (roughly) version 2, which is roughly what I play. The 1NT rebid on a strong hand is great, but also good is the artificial 2NT rebid.

We've only just started playing T-Walsh and are keeping it simple, so 1C - 1D -
1H = a weak NT or an unbalanced hand with 3 hearts
2H = min with 3 hearts
2NT = game forcing with clubs or various heart raises

1C - 1D - 1H - 1S is non-forcing scramble

We have kept most of our current methods after the 'old' 1C - 1H - 1NT where we used to play 2C as a relay to 2D and transfers, so now 1C - 1D - 1H - 2C is a relay to 2D, breakable on an unbalanced hand with 3 trumps.

We play different methods in competition. We still play transfers after an overcall (e.g. 1C x xx = diamonds, 1D = hearts etc) but now completion shows 3-card support and 1NT is weak. The difference is that responder has made a free bid, so there is less danger in rebidding 2NT and more benefit in showing the level of the fit at once.

[gnasher]

jdonn, on Feb 27 2009, 10:47 PM, said:

It's not the lack of frequency of 1NT that bothers me. It's the wasted space of having a two point range at such a low level where invites and lot's of exploration below 3NT really are not needed. I definitely prefer 17-19 to 18-19 as long as it fits into the rest of the system, because it widens the range not because it increases the frequency.

Why not play the 1NT rebid as 18-20, and increase the strength of your 2NT opening to 21-22? The auction after a 2NT opening is often imprecise, so reducing its frequency is a good thing.

[paulg]

gnasher, on Feb 28 2009, 10:45 PM, said:

jdonn, on Feb 27 2009, 10:47 PM, said:

It's not the lack of frequency of 1NT that bothers me. It's the wasted space of having a two point range at such a low level where invites and lot's of exploration below 3NT really are not needed. I definitely prefer 17-19 to 18-19 as long as it fits into the rest of the system, because it widens the range not because it increases the frequency.

Why not play the 1NT rebid as 18-20, and increase the strength of your 2NT opening to 21-22? The auction after a 2NT opening is often imprecise, so reducing its frequency is a good thing.

One issue is how you show this hand after the 1♠ response. Many still rebid 2NT here and the wider range is a little unwieldy.

p

[OleBerg]

cardsharp, on Mar 1 2009, 10:42 AM, said:

gnasher, on Feb 28 2009, 10:45 PM, said:

jdonn, on Feb 27 2009, 10:47 PM, said:

It's not the lack of frequency of 1NT that bothers me. It's the wasted space of having a two point range at such a low level where invites and lot's of exploration below 3NT really are not needed. I definitely prefer 17-19 to 18-19 as long as it fits into the rest of the system, because it widens the range not because it increases the frequency.

Why not play the 1NT rebid as 18-20, and increase the strength of your 2NT opening to 21-22? The auction after a 2NT opening is often imprecise, so reducing its frequency is a good thing.

One issue is how you show this hand after the 1♠ response. Many still rebid 2NT here and the wider range is a little unwieldy.

p

You don't need to have the same rebid-ranges after 1♠. It is entirely reasonable to play:

1♣ - 1♦/♥
1NT = 15-16

and

1♣ - 1♠
1NT = 15-17

[sheepman]

Well, depending what 1C-1S is (no major/some strong things for me) you can invert 2D/2N over that, ie 1C-1S!-2D as 17/19 bal, and still have room for an invite I've even passed it and picked up 90. Simple over that is 2H balish inv, 2S puppet to 2N, 2N asks minors (4C/4D/5C/5D) then you have the whole of the 3 lvl straight away and after the puppet to sort out your other options in the spade.

[OleBerg]

sheepman, on Mar 2 2009, 01:42 AM, said:

Well, depending what 1C-1S is (no major/some strong things for me) you can invert 2D/2N over that, ie 1C-1S!-2D as 17/19 bal, and still have room for an invite I've even passed it and picked up 90. Simple over that is 2H balish inv, 2S puppet to 2N, 2N asks minors (4C/4D/5C/5D) then you have the whole of the 3 lvl straight away and after the puppet to sort out your other options in the spade.

If 1♣-1♠ promises some values, like 5+ hcp, it doesn't cost much to let 2♥ be a 2 way bid:

Either a natural reverse, or a strong balanced hand.

After 2♥, 2♠ is a relay, where 2NT shows the balanced hand, and other bids show clubs + hearts.