Help
Does anyone play transfers (Rubensohl or whatnot) after partner doubles a weak two? If so, please describe your method. Does it change for a passed hand or a balancing double?
Page 1 of 1
Transfers after takeout of weak 2
#1
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 4,942
- Joined: 2005-January-28
- Gender:Male
- Location:Cologne, Germany
- Interests:Sleeping, Eating
Posted 2012-March-24, 23:08
"One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"
-- Bertrand Russell
-- Bertrand Russell
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,309
- Joined: 2005-February-09
- Gender:Male
- Location:Zurich, Switzerland
Posted 2012-March-24, 23:24
I've tried this and didn't think it worked that well. Basically the issue is that over 2M-X-Pass, I want to have two ways to bid clubs at the three-level. One should show values (but not GF) and the other should be weak. These two ways basically have to be 2NT and 3♣ (as they are the only two bids) but this basically forces a natural approach rather than transfers.
This is different from over 1NT-(bid) where partner has a much narrower range.
This is different from over 1NT-(bid) where partner has a much narrower range.
Adam W. Meyerson
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#3
- Limit bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,482
- Joined: 2004-November-02
- Gender:Female
- Location:England
- Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those
Posted 2012-March-25, 12:33
I don't think it's so much the 'narrower range' part of it, but rather that after 1NT - (bid) you can pass on a bad hand as responder; after (2M) - x -(P) you have to bid so you need some way to distinguish strength.
We toyed with playing
(2S) dbl (P) -
2NT = weak with clubs or constructive with a red suit
3C = constructive
3red = weak
but it didn't seem do gain anything much
We toyed with playing
(2S) dbl (P) -
2NT = weak with clubs or constructive with a red suit
3C = constructive
3red = weak
but it didn't seem do gain anything much
#4
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 636
- Joined: 2011-December-01
- Gender:Not Telling
- Location:UK
-
Interests:Bridge, Poker, but not in conflation.
Statistics, but not massaged by the media.
Posted 2012-March-25, 17:36
Lebensohl I think is much better after X of a weak 2. Rubinsohl is probably better after our 1NT is overcalled, though it's much closer. This was discussed as a side topic on a thread about Leb v Rub a couple of months ago, probably on this board (from memory).
A perfection of means, and confusion of aims, seems to be our main problem – Albert Einstein
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,290
- Joined: 2004-May-03
- Gender:Male
- Location:London, England
Posted 2012-March-25, 19:04
mgoetze, on 2012-March-24, 23:08, said:
Does anyone play transfers (Rubensohl or whatnot) after partner doubles a weak two? If so, please describe your method. Does it change for a passed hand or a balancing double?
Lebensohl is used in two main situations -
a) Partner has narrowly limited his strength, and we can pass with all weak hands [eg 1N-2S]. We give up on invites and play suits are forcing, lebensohl is competitive.
b) Partner is wide-ranging and we cannot pass with a weak hand [eg 2S-X-P]. Suits are invitational, weaker hands go through 2NT.
In the former case, transfers are clearly an improvement on lebensohl. In the latter case, transfers do not work, as you cannot distinguish invitational hands from weak ones. There is, however, a case for using 2NT as some form of scramble.
Page 1 of 1