[MickyB]

2♣ = 6 cards or (41)35, 10-14 points

Seems most are still using 2♦ enquiry, 2M nat NF here. What's opener's normal action if responder bids 2M into his singleton - pass or pull? Sure there must be a better scheme using transfers.

[straube]

I think pull. I know Cohen-Berkowitz (who promise 6 clubs) use 2M as F1 (one-round force)...and I bet RM Precision does the same. Not sure if it's legal or winning, but you could switch the 2H and 2S responses so that you could sometimes play 2S (2C-2H, 2S-P).

[david_c]

Rigal says opener will "correct to another contract with one or fewer trumps", and gives the example

♠AJ84 ♥3 ♦K42 ♣AJ754

where the auction starts 2♣:2♥,2♠.

Presumably if you switch the majors he bids 2NT over 2♠.

As MickyB knows, I would pass minimum 1435 hands, so I don't end up in 2NT with rubbish.

[keylime]

Larry and I use transfers, and Reese stated in one of this texts that this is superior to playing 2M as a NF call. I have played where 2M was forcing one round prior to Larry.

[PrecisionL]

We play transfers over a Precision 2♣ opening (very good 5-card suit, usually 6♣). Opener accepts the transfer with a doubleton, and with less he rebids 3♣ (minimum) or anything else to show a maximum. We do not open 2♣ with a 4-card major.

Another method is to play 2♦ asks for a major suit fragment: xxx or Hx.

With 5,6-clubs and a 4-card major we open 1♦.

[sireenb]

We only open 2♣ with six cards. We play 2M response as NAT, 7-bad 10 HCP, NF. Partner will only pass with tolerance for the major and no further interest.

We stopped opening 2♣ with 5 cards of ♣ mainly because of the problems with 2M over it.

[david_c]

PrecisionL, on Feb 9 2009, 03:15 PM, said:

We play transfers over a Precision 2♣ opening (very good 5-card suit, usually 6♣). Opener accepts the transfer with a doubleton, and with less he rebids 3♣ (minimum) or anything else to show a maximum.

You rebid 3♣ with a 5-card suit? Doesn't that severely restrict the number of hands that responder can bid a transfer on?

I'm not convinced that transfers are really playable over a 5-card 2♣ opening. Though they certainly work nicely when it promises six.

[keylime]

Pretty rare we get to open 2♣ on a good five card suit, but I think the method of transfers works well with us.

[MickyB]

david_c, on Feb 9 2009, 10:36 PM, said:

I'm not convinced that transfers are really playable over a 5-card 2♣ opening. Though they certainly work nicely when it promises six.

What makes you say this, David? The response to the transfer should be pretty much the same as to a NF 2M bid (obviously with 2M replacing pass), so I don't see how partner potentially being 1435 opposite a NF hand with spades is more difficult playing transfers.

I've not read it in much detail, but the scheme here seems promising, using 2D as H or various other handtypes.

[david_c]

MickyB, on Feb 11 2009, 08:33 AM, said:

david_c, on Feb 9 2009, 10:36 PM, said:

I'm not convinced that transfers are really playable over a 5-card 2♣ opening. Though they certainly work nicely when it promises six.

What makes you say this, David? The response to the transfer should be pretty much the same as to a NF 2M bid (obviously with 2M replacing pass), so I don't see how partner potentially being 1435 opposite a NF hand with spades is more difficult playing transfers.

It's difficult to say exactly because there are so many different ways you could try to do it. But I've tried various ways and none of them worked to my satisfaction. I would have dismissed the method you linked to, for example, on the grounds that it doesn't help you when you have a weakish hand with 5+ hearts: you can transfer to 2♥, but if opener completes the transfer you don't know whether he has a doubleton (in which case you want to play 2♥) or 4-card support (in which case you want to be in game). The traditional Precision responses find the big major-suit fits when they are there, and I think this is very important.

[shintaro]

Interested to know if you have 4405 Good 5 clubs do you still open 2♣ (we don't)

But if you could hold a 4 Card Major then we use 2♦ as Stayman

Works for us

[TimG]

MickyB, on Feb 11 2009, 02:33 AM, said:

david_c, on Feb 9 2009, 10:36 PM, said:

I'm not convinced that transfers are really playable over a 5-card 2♣ opening. Though they certainly work nicely when it promises six.

What makes you say this, David? The response to the transfer should be pretty much the same as to a NF 2M bid (obviously with 2M replacing pass), so I don't see how partner potentially being 1435 opposite a NF hand with spades is more difficult playing transfers.

I've not read it in much detail, but the scheme here seems promising, using 2D as H or various other handtypes.

I think the problem arises when responder wishes to hunt for a 4-4 major suit fit. This can be awkward of 2D and 2H are used for transfers. If 2C promises 6 clubs and denies a four-card major, this is obviously not a consideration. If a 2C opener which contains a 4-card major will necessarily be maximum, it is not as much of a consideration.

[PrecisionL]

I saw the NEC Convention Regulations for Side Games in their Daily Bulletins:

http://www.jcbl.or.j...09/nec_bul.html

Convention Regulations for Side Games
(An explanation for foreign players)

LIST C (Yokohama IMP Pairs / Asuka Cup)

Responses and Rebids:

6. All responses to;
a) artificial strong opening bids with 15 HCP or more.
b) opening bids of 2♣ or higher (weak 2s must guarantee 10 opening points: opening points = HCP + number of cards in longest suit).

Maybe I should submit this to the ACBL for their consideration?

[straube]

TimG, on Feb 11 2009, 09:09 AM, said:

MickyB, on Feb 11 2009, 02:33 AM, said:

david_c, on Feb 9 2009, 10:36 PM, said:

I'm not convinced that transfers are really playable over a 5-card 2♣ opening. Though they certainly work nicely when it promises six.

What makes you say this, David? The response to the transfer should be pretty much the same as to a NF 2M bid (obviously with 2M replacing pass), so I don't see how partner potentially being 1435 opposite a NF hand with spades is more difficult playing transfers.

I've not read it in much detail, but the scheme here seems promising, using 2D as H or various other handtypes.

I think the problem arises when responder wishes to hunt for a 4-4 major suit fit. This can be awkward of 2D and 2H are used for transfers. If 2C promises 6 clubs and denies a four-card major, this is obviously not a consideration. If a 2C opener which contains a 4-card major will necessarily be maximum, it is not as much of a consideration.

In the Polish structure, 2D isn't a transfer; it's an asking bid. They've arranged their asking bid so that 2C-2D, 2H looks like it is passable...but it really should not be passed. Why? Because responder needs to have invitational strength to use 2D and opener's 2H rebid has not denied extra strength.

The Polish structure has avenues to find 4-4 major suit fits. The way I read their structure, they can lose a 4-4 heart fit when responder has both 4-card majors and both opener and responder are minimal. In this case the auction goes...

2C-2D, 2H-2S, 2N and only four spades have been revealed.

I think you will have an easier auction if you always promise 6 clubs. Also, 2D should let opener bid beyond 3C.

[Gerben42]

You could play 4-card transfers:

2♣ - 2♦ = Transfer to ♥. Accept with 0-2♥, bid 3♦ and up with 4♥ and 2♠ / 2NT with 3♥.

2♣ - 2♥ = Transfer to ♠. Accept with 0-2♠, bid 2NT with 3♠ and describe your hand with 4♠

2♣ - 2♠ = Asking for min / max and shortness
2♣ - 2NT = Asking to bid 3NT with a good suit
2♣ - 3♣ = Asking to pass

[mycroft]

PrecisionL, on Feb 15 2009, 12:59 PM, said:

I saw the NEC Convention Regulations for Side Games in their Daily Bulletins:
http://www.jcbl.or.j...09/nec_bul.html
Convention Regulations for Side Games(An explanation for foreign players)

LIST C (Yokohama IMP Pairs / Asuka Cup)
Responses and Rebids:
6.  All responses to;
    a) artificial strong opening bids with 15 HCP or more.
    opening bids of 2♣ or higher (weak 2s must guarantee 10 opening points: opening points = HCP + number of cards in longest suit).

Maybe I should submit this to the ACBL for their consideration?

Well, if you want to play 4-14 weak 2s, or Bergen 2s (6 and 4), sure.

Otherwise,

Quote

ARTIFICIAL AND CONVENTIONAL CALLS after strong (15+ HCP),                 
forcing opening bids and after opening bids of two clubs or higher. (For 
this classification, by partnership agreement, weak two-bids must be     
within a range of 7 HCP and the suit must contain at least five cards – See
#7 under DISALLOWED.)

should be adequate.

Of course, given that the changes to the GCC from when the JCBL took it as its template were explicitly to "discourage" Bergen weak 2s, I doubt if it's going to do any good if you do submit it.

[Apollo81]

MickyB, on Feb 9 2009, 12:04 AM, said:

2♣ = 6 cards or (41)35, 10-14 points

Seems most are still using 2♦ enquiry, 2M nat NF here. What's opener's normal action if responder bids 2M into his singleton - pass or pull? Sure there must be a better scheme using transfers.

One possible structure:

After 2♣-2M:

pass: 2-3 card support and min, dead minimum if 3
2♠: 3145 or 2146, allows responder to respond 2♥ with 5521 hands and get out in 2♠
2NT: minimum with 0-1 in the major, nearly always converted to 3♣
3♣: maximum with 0-2 in the major, frequently passed, but sometimes carried on to game or 3M
3♦: too good to rebid 3♣, possible example: Kx x x AKQxxxxx after a 2♠ response
3M: 3-card support and not a dead minimum
3NT: like a 3♦ bid, ok with declaring in 3NT
higher: support and a maximum

The thing I like about this is that the hands where opener rebids 2NT will virtually never be played in notrump, so we avoid wrong-siding.