[rd6789]

For a while I have played simple transfer responses to 1C (16+) so 1H=S, 1S=bal, 1NT=C etc , opener completes the transfer to initiate an asking bid sequence.

We are now considering playing 2-under transfers, so 1H=bal, 1S=C, 1NT=D, 2C=H, 2D=S

Now opener can complete the transfer with an unblanced hand and initiate asking bids, or bid one suit up to show a balanced hand (with 3+ card support) allowing responder to start on asking bids if he wants.

Has anyone played anything like this? The main drawback is you lose a bit of space but allowing either side to take control of the auction fi they want to seems to have a big advantage. Any other comemnts?

[wclass___]

Quote

you lose a bit of space

A bit?

Quote

allowing either side to take control of the auction

When opener is not interested to control the auction, he normally breaks relay structure and responder can now be a captain.
1♣-1♥(showing ♠'s) - 1N,2♣,2♦.. choose one, there is enough room for your plan.

[whereagles]

I made up a whole scheme based on asking bids over transfer responses to a strong diamond (1♠ = bal, 2♣+ = 5+ next suit).

Tried it on a couple hands and it had potential.. but I never got to play it.

[Jlall]

Major suits are more important than minor suits in bridge.

[xcurt]

Jlall, on Aug 29 2009, 10:08 AM, said:

Major suits are more important than minor suits in bridge.

i think this oversimplifies

lets assume imp scoring. lets also assume no opponent interference since they already passes a big club auction at the one level.

lets examine the conditions where we benefit more by locating a major suit fit relative to locating a minor suit fit.

a. our suit is more likely to outrank theirs in a competitive auction. there is big difference here in finding a fit between diamonds and hearts when we could have found a fit in a higher ranking suit. not an issue with them passing.

b. majors have a huge edge at mps at the partscore level. assumed imps plus we are in a gf.

c. 4M is a much more likely game than 5m. but we have more room in the major suit auction since our safety level, which is a dynamic function of the auction as it progresses, is 4M in a major suit fit auction but 3N in a non fit or minor suit fit auction. if we ask what is the optimal allocation of space over various auctions non fit, major fit, minor fit, given we already fg and no interference, i imagine it would be relatively even over all of those at imps since our primary goal
is to capture the game bonus and our secondary goal to safely investigate slams in any strain below the safety level.

[Cascade]

3NT is only the safety level on those hands where 3NT makes and 5minor does not. And is even higher if your methods allow you to bypass 3NT and allow you still to play 4NT (assuming that is also making).

At IMPs you should be playing 5minor much more frequently than MPs

1. because it is safer

2. because you have bypassed 3NT to investigate slam

[PrecisionL]

I have played a version of a strong club with transfer responses where we used the acceptance of the transfer as a Beta ask for controls.

Then we graduated to transferring to 4-card majors and 5-card minors or NT with Beta asks.

Then we graduated to having the transfer acceptance be a relay for distribution and a later bid (usually at the 3-level) be the Beta ask. This worked out much better.

Now, we play ... oh, well enough of this.

[akhare]

Why not go for the full enchilada and play something like TOSR? You get transfer responses with the efficiency of symmetric relays...

[rd6789]

Thank you all for your comments.

We don't play enough to go to something like TOSR, but like to mess about with the sytem from time to time

It is interesting how our system seems to have developed towards what others play - for example we changed 2C to guarantee 6 after some bad boards in 2CX and changed 2D opener to be (34)15 as well as 4414 and 4405

[shintaro]

rd6789, on Aug 30 2009, 05:32 AM, said:

Thank you all for your comments.



It is interesting how our system seems to have developed towards what others play - for example we changed 2C to guarantee 6 after some bad boards in 2CX and changed 2D opener to be (34)15 as well as 4414 and 4405

We do smething similiar mainly because of same bad boards when opening a rubbish 5 card ♣ thus we need either a GOOD 5 or at least 6 to open 2♣

But we only do inversions 1♠= NT and 1NT=♠ not generally interested in Minors

[rd6789]

shintaro, on Aug 30 2009, 11:05 AM, said:

We do something similiar mainly because of same bad boards when opening a rubbish 5 card ♣ thus we need either a GOOD 5 or at least 6 to  open 2♣

This was our first thought but then we decided if you could find bids for hands with a 4 card major and a poor 5 card club suit why not use them when the club suit is good as well? Then when you open 2C you always have 6 so you are better placed to judge the competitive auction

[Cascade]

rd6789, on Aug 30 2009, 10:32 PM, said:

Thank you all for your comments.

We don't play enough to go to something like TOSR, but like to mess about with the sytem from time to time

It is interesting how our system seems to have developed towards what others play - for example we changed 2C to guarantee 6 after some bad boards in 2CX and changed 2D opener to be (34)15 as well as 4414 and 4405

I actually find that something rigid like symmetric relay is much easy to play in an infrequent partnership than standard methods that inevitably require many often subtle implicit partnership understandings.

[rd6789]

Cascade, on Aug 30 2009, 01:00 PM, said:

rd6789, on Aug 30 2009, 10:32 PM, said:

Thank you all for your comments.

We don't play enough to go to something like TOSR, but like to mess about with the sytem from time to time

It is interesting how our system seems to have developed towards what others play - for example we changed 2C to guarantee 6 after some bad boards in 2CX and changed 2D opener to be (34)15 as well as 4414 and 4405

I actually find that something rigid like symmetric relay is much easy to play in an infrequent partnership than standard methods that inevitably require many often subtle implicit partnership understandings.

That is intersteing - could you direct me to link where I can find a well-doumented version? Thx

[akhare]

rd6789, on Aug 30 2009, 01:35 PM, said:

Cascade, on Aug 30 2009, 01:00 PM, said:

rd6789, on Aug 30 2009, 10:32 PM, said:

Thank you all for your comments.

We don't play enough to go to something like TOSR, but like to mess about with the sytem from time to time

It is interesting how our system seems to have developed towards what others play - for example we changed 2C to guarantee 6 after some bad boards in 2CX and changed 2D opener to be (34)15 as well as 4414 and 4405

I actually find that something rigid like symmetric relay is much easy to play in an infrequent partnership than standard methods that inevitably require many often subtle implicit partnership understandings.

That is intersteing - could you direct me to link where I can find a well-doumented version? Thx

I would recommend the following:

1) Start off with Andre Sharko's excellent tutorial to get an idea of what symmetric relays are about (Symmetric

2) Take a look at the Richard Willey's document to see how transfer oriented relays work over 1♣ opening (his methods use 15+, but 16+ works too)Moscito Relays.

The TOSR relays are well documented too (search for TOSR notrump), but I prefer these.

3) Get hold of the excellent B2SYM software (PM me). It's an indispensible tool for practising.

In case of questions just post here or look for the usual suspects online...

[Cascade]

Have a look at Andrei Sharko's description for relays. He and I play a very plain symmetric relay.

In the past I have played this sort of transfer response structure:

1♣ 1♥ Spades
1♠ 1NT Hearts
... 2♣ diamonds
... 2♦ clubs
... 2♥ clubs reverser
... 2♠ Single suiter relays

1♣ 1♥ Spades
1♠ 1NT Hearts
2♣ 2♦ 3-suited relays
... 2♥ reverser
... 2♠ long legged (5/5)
... 2NT 2-suiter relays

1♣ 1♠ Balanced or hearts and diamonds
1NT 2♣ Hearts and diamonds
... 2♦ Balanced relays

1♣ 1♠
1NT 2♣ Hearts and diamonds
2♦ 2♥ reverser
... 2♠ long legged (5/5)
... 2NT 2-suiter relays

1♣ 1NT Clubs or Hearts and Clubs
2♣ 2♦ Hearts and Clubs
... 2♥ Hearts and Clubs reverser (longer clubs)
... 2♠ single suiter relays

1♣ 1NT Clubs or Hearts and Clubs
2♣ 2♦ Hearts and Clubs
2♥ 2♠ long legged
... 2NT 2-suiter relays

1♣ 2♣ Diamonds or minor three suiter
2♦ 2♥ three suited relays
... 2♠ single suiter relays

1♣ 2♦ Hearts
2♥ 2♠ single suiter relays

1♣ 2♥ minors reverser
... 2♠ minors long legged
... 2NT minors two suiter relays

One Suited Relays

2♠ High shortage
2NT Mid shortage
3♣ 6322 (or 7222)
3♦ 5332
3♥ 6331
3♠ 7321 (ambiguity here in standard symmetric)
3NT 7330

Two Suited Relays

2♥ Reverser - longer suit is lower ranking
2♠ long legged - 5/5
2NT High shortage
3♣ 5422 (Or 7411) even shortage
3♦ 5431
3♥ 6421
3♠ 6430
3NT 7420

Three Suited Relays

These start at slightly different levels

1st step High Shortage
2nd step 4441
3rd step 4450
4th step 4540
5th step 5440