BBO Discussion Forums: transfers in competition - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

transfers in competition

#1 User is offline   1eyedjack 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,575
  • Joined: 2004-March-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 2011-July-26, 23:57

You (South) hold
Jxxx
xx
KQxxx
Ax

After
W....N....E.....S
1...X....P.....??

Question 1: Playing standard methods, how do you rank in merit the options of (1) 2, (2) 2, (3) 2, (4) Other (if superior, specified)

In fact you are not playing standard methods, but 2 would be a transfer to , 2 would be a transfer to , 2 would be a transfer to and 2 would be a strong balanced hand without a good trump strain and without adequate guard (but presumably some length) in . When transferring into a suit you promise 4+ cards in the suit and at least sufficient values for a natural, non-forcing, standard jump shift response.

Playing this method, a transfer to Diamonds followed by 2 would be natural and showing a second suit.

Question 2: If you play this method, is the 2 followup (after transfer to ) normally forcing?

Question 3: Whatever your answer to Q2, would the treatment be suitable on this hand (ie is it too weak to force, or too strong not to)? Presumably if you think that the hand is not suitable, then you would choose between a transfer to or transfer to followed by pass, whichever is consistent with your answer to Q1.

I appreciate that a parnership could agree to a variety of treatments, but these transfers are not uncommon and I am wondering which way is popular among those who do use them.

Thanks
Psych (pron. saik): A gross and deliberate misstatement of honour strength and/or suit length. Expressly permitted under Law 73E but forbidden contrary to that law by Acol club tourneys.

Psyche (pron. sahy-kee): The human soul, spirit or mind (derived, personification thereof, beloved of Eros, Greek myth).
Masterminding (pron. mPosted ImagesPosted ImagetPosted Imager-mPosted ImagendPosted Imageing) tr. v. - Any bid made by bridge player with which partner disagrees.

"Gentlemen, when the barrage lifts." 9th battalion, King's own Yorkshire light infantry,
2000 years earlier: "morituri te salutant"

"I will be with you, whatever". Blair to Bush, precursor to invasion of Iraq
0

#2 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2011-July-27, 01:17

I think that in this case there is more than one "standard" approach.

In England 2 is usually played as forcing to agreement. If that's our agreement, I bid 2, obviously.

I believe that in some parts of the world 2 is usually played as game-forcing (or game-forcing unless it's both majors). If that's our agreement (and assuming I manage to resist the temptation to tear up my cards and run screaming from the room) I'll bid 2 anyway.

Playing transfers, I think that 2 followed by 2 should be a one-round force. I don't see much benefit to playing it as game-forcing, and playing it as non-forcing would create a problem if advancer did have the values for game.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

#3 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,663
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2011-July-27, 05:56

The answer to Q1 depends to some extent on the style of takeout double you are playing. Playing a non major-centric style a 2D response seems normal, you can show the spades if partner makes a move; if diamonds can be short then 2C becomes more appealing. The answer to Q2 might depend on the meaning of 2D. Since 2C showed values there is no reason that the doubler has to complete the transfer, hence 2D has a meaning. I think it is clear that the default here should be forcing but not game-forcing. Q3 I simply do not fully understand; playing these methods I really cannot see anything other than 2C followed by 2S being logical, unless the unspecified meaning of 2D would make passing an option.
(-: Zel :-)

Happy New Year everyone!
0

#4 User is offline   fromageGB 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,676
  • Joined: 2008-April-06

Posted 2011-July-27, 06:13

Almost agree with gnasher. If "forcing to agreement" means I can pass a suit I agree with, then I am happy with 2, but if it means I have to raise to 3 then I don't think I am strong enough, and would bid 2. I guess it depends how strong doubler has to be.

However, if 2 is GF, I definitely prefer 2.

Perfect hand for transfers, though. Following with spades is a "1 bid" force only (not a "1 round", as I can pass partner's (eg 3) bid. It could be a 1 round force if transfers started at the 1 level. (Why not?)
0

#5 User is offline   1eyedjack 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,575
  • Joined: 2004-March-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 2011-July-27, 06:22

View PostfromageGB, on 2011-July-27, 06:13, said:

It could be a 1 round force if transfers started at the 1 level. (Why not?)

Do players transfer at the one level? A sort of transfer-Walsh style in competion? ie 1D = Hearts, 1H = Spades, 1S = Diamonds. The cost being that you are forced to the 2 level if insisting on diamonds on what might be a bust, possibly outweighed by the positive benefits of transferring into the major. I don't say that I dislike this, but I am not convinced that it would translate to the general case in response to other takeout doubles. Ie if it goes (1H)-X-(P)-? then I would really rather that a 1S bid showed Spades.
Psych (pron. saik): A gross and deliberate misstatement of honour strength and/or suit length. Expressly permitted under Law 73E but forbidden contrary to that law by Acol club tourneys.

Psyche (pron. sahy-kee): The human soul, spirit or mind (derived, personification thereof, beloved of Eros, Greek myth).
Masterminding (pron. mPosted ImagesPosted ImagetPosted Imager-mPosted ImagendPosted Imageing) tr. v. - Any bid made by bridge player with which partner disagrees.

"Gentlemen, when the barrage lifts." 9th battalion, King's own Yorkshire light infantry,
2000 years earlier: "morituri te salutant"

"I will be with you, whatever". Blair to Bush, precursor to invasion of Iraq
0

#6 User is offline   1eyedjack 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,575
  • Joined: 2004-March-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 2011-July-27, 06:25

View PostZelandakh, on 2011-July-27, 05:56, said:

The answer to Q2 might depend on the meaning of 2D. Since 2C showed values there is no reason that the doubler has to complete the transfer, hence 2D has a meaning.

The meaning of 2D is that doubler would have passed a natural but non-forcing jump shift to 2D (ie if not playing transfers). Doubler would normally accept the transfer if he does not have extras for his original double (and therefore must have Diamond tolerance). This inference arguably increases the benefits of having a new suit by transferor as being GF rather than just F1.
Psych (pron. saik): A gross and deliberate misstatement of honour strength and/or suit length. Expressly permitted under Law 73E but forbidden contrary to that law by Acol club tourneys.

Psyche (pron. sahy-kee): The human soul, spirit or mind (derived, personification thereof, beloved of Eros, Greek myth).
Masterminding (pron. mPosted ImagesPosted ImagetPosted Imager-mPosted ImagendPosted Imageing) tr. v. - Any bid made by bridge player with which partner disagrees.

"Gentlemen, when the barrage lifts." 9th battalion, King's own Yorkshire light infantry,
2000 years earlier: "morituri te salutant"

"I will be with you, whatever". Blair to Bush, precursor to invasion of Iraq
0

#7 User is offline   fromageGB 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,676
  • Joined: 2008-April-06

Posted 2011-July-27, 06:43

View Post1eyedjack, on 2011-July-27, 06:22, said:

Do players transfer at the one level? A sort of transfer-Walsh style in competion? ie 1D = Hearts, 1H = Spades, 1S = Diamonds. The cost being that you are forced to the 2 level if insisting on diamonds on what might be a bust, possibly outweighed by the positive benefits of transferring into the major. I don't say that I dislike this, but I am not convinced that it would translate to the general case in response to other takeout doubles. Ie if it goes (1H)-X-(P)-? then I would really rather that a 1S bid showed Spades.

I agree with you that it would not apply to anything other than a double of a club, but that's what I play in this circumstance. If the 1 is not a "strong club" variety, then for us a double says "I would have opened a club". We play our normal transfer walsh responses, and they are better at the major fits than a normal takeout double would be.

If 3rd seat opponents bid, we treat it as an overcall after our 1, and still play transfers if it is at the one level. For example, (1) X (1) X shows 4 or more spades, 1 is a transfer to NT, and 2 would be a weak 2 type of hand.

Admittedly, a weak diamond hand is a problem. But I think the gain in the majors makes it worthwhile.
0

#8 User is offline   dake50 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,211
  • Joined: 2006-April-22

Posted 2011-July-27, 15:04

Not playing transfers, I could always get this auction right
by sign-off 2D a shotgun fast BIT;
invite 2D by considered BIT before 2D bid;
GF by "is your 1C natural?" 2D.

I think transfers are right for solving
this force/non-force question ethically.
Besides 'stuff' in diamonds may be gold to partner,
encouraging a borderline decision to show his spades.
Quits in 3D in reserved.

Yes even at the one level this 'stuff' information is useful.
0

#9 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2011-July-28, 03:57

View PostfromageGB, on 2011-July-27, 06:13, said:

Almost agree with gnasher. If "forcing to agreement" means I can pass a suit I agree with, then I am happy with 2, but if it means I have to raise to 3 then I don't think I am strong enough, and would bid 2. I guess it depends how strong doubler has to be.
...
Perfect hand for transfers, though. Following with spades is a "1 bid" force only (not a "1 round", as I can pass partner's (eg 3) bid.


Suppose that you have a 4-4 spade fit and partner is minimum. As I understand it, you don't want to start with a cue-bid, because that will get you to 3. However, you are happy to start with a transfer and follow with a forcing 2. Isn't that going to get you to 3 too?

Edit: By the way, I think that the term "one-round force", as commonly used, means only "forcing partner to bid on the next round". The player issuing the force doesn't commit to bidding again.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

#10 User is offline   whereagles 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 14,900
  • Joined: 2004-May-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal
  • Interests:Everything!

Posted 2011-July-28, 04:18

I played methods like these a loooooooooong time ago. I would transfer to diamonds (showing an an invitational or better hand) and follow up with 2. That should get the message across.

I don't recommend using transfers for the weaker responses because you lack bidding space. As a rule, transfer advances, be it after dbl or an overcall, start at the cue-bid. (And in competition they remain transfers whenever the cue-bid step is not taken.)
0

#11 User is offline   fromageGB 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,676
  • Joined: 2008-April-06

Posted 2011-July-28, 04:49

View Postgnasher, on 2011-July-28, 03:57, said:

Suppose that you have a 4-4 spade fit and partner is minimum. As I understand it, you don't want to start with a cue-bid, because that will get you to 3. However, you are happy to start with a transfer and follow with a forcing 2. Isn't that going to get you to 3 too?

Edit: By the way, I think that the term "one-round force", as commonly used, means only "forcing partner to bid on the next round". The player issuing the force doesn't commit to bidding again.

Thanks for the clarification of the one round force, I am sure you are right.

I am not happy to force to 3 spades, unless partner's double is a classic 4441 with good strength. However, people these days tend to double on any sort of 12 count that doesn't have a good bid, or weaker three suiters. Having said that, it is a borderline hand, and if you do happen to play the common "transfers at/above the level of cue bid" method, then this is an ideal hand to show both the diamonds and spades to help partner into the right contract. This should be a 1 round force, and you hope partner has not warped his double too much.

So double standards maybe, I admit. If I can't show my hand clearly, I don't want to force to 3 spades, but would do so if I can clearly describe the hand - or if I could rely on partner's double.
0

#12 User is offline   benlessard 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,464
  • Joined: 2006-January-07
  • Location:Montreal Canada
  • Interests:All games. i really mean all of them.

Posted 2011-July-28, 09:23

The biggest problem with transfers at the 1 level is that pts rate to be split in the 17-23 range and it will give too many options for the opener wich rate to have a hand with extras.

(1C)-X-(P)-1H show spades.

opener can X with 4H, bid 1S with 6C/4D bid 2C/3C in a preemptive fashion or pass and bid club later to show stronger hands he can also pass & X for penalty-ish and use pass and 1Nt as a balancing takeout.

Also im not too sure about it but i think it tend to wrongside the hand. Since the doubler tend to be short in clubs opener suit is usually a real suit and the stoppers are usually into RHO even if hes weakish.

But i do love transfers at the 2 level, if 2D = transfer to 2H im not sure about the 2H/2S responses.

Keeping the transfers approach 2H = Spades and 2S = bal without a full stopper/ or unclear hand. But i think it might be better to play 2H= both M 8-10 pts and 2S as natural non-forcing. Those 54/45/44 hands in the 7-10 pts are fairly frequent and often annoying when you miss the best fit.

I know the French play a different system that allow to make the difference between 4 and 5 cards suit at the 2 level.
From Psych "I mean, Gus and I never see eye-to-eye on work stuff.
For instance, he doesn't like being used as a human shield when we're being shot at.
I happen to think it's a very noble way to meet one's maker, especially for a guy like him.
Bottom line is we never let that difference of opinion interfere with anything."
0

#13 User is offline   fromageGB 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,676
  • Joined: 2008-April-06

Posted 2011-July-28, 16:15

View Postbenlessard, on 2011-July-28, 09:23, said:

The biggest problem with transfers at the 1 level is that pts rate to be split in the 17-23 range and it will give too many options for the opener wich rate to have a hand with extras.
...
Those 54/45/44 hands in the 7-10 pts are fairly frequent and often annoying when you miss the best fit.

I know the French play a different system that allow to make the difference between 4 and 5 cards suit at the 2 level.

I agree that transfers at the 1 level allow opener to easily come in with a further bid, but one advantage is that you can distinguish between 4 and 5 card majors and play at the 2 level.

As for those weak 45xx or 54xx hands, we have a specific bid of 1NT that shows this. With no opposition bidding doubler bids a 4 card major if he has one, 2 if he hasn't, and you then transfer to the 5 card major. Of course, if opener doubles or bids 2 doubler passes with no 4 card major for the same result.

Yes, playing transfer responses as advancer does wrong-side the contract, but better to be in the right contract the wrong way round than vice versa. However, playing the double to mean "I would have opened 1" does not mean the doubler is short. He probably has as many clubs as opener.
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users