[akhare]

I saw an interesting sequence the VuGraph the other day:

1♣ - (1♠) - 2♦ (alerted as transfer to ♥).

The transfer was ostensibly to play or forward going (note that 1♣ opening was "natural", presumably showing 3+).

This seems to be derivative of Capp/1MX.

Does anyone have more details about this convention?

[Flame]

take a look at equality on daniel's page.
http://www.geocities...neill_2000/sys/

[whereagles]

I've once studied sequences such as that and found out that:

1. A little bit tweaking (transfers, specialized cues, full scheme such as equality, etc) does increase precision as compared to usual methods.

2. That increase in precision is helpful, but not decisive in most hands.

3. Unfortunately most ways of tweaking involve some rather non-mnemonic sequences that give you a hard time memorizing and systematizing.

So my conclusion was: forget them. It doesn't pay for the extra memory work needed. Unless you're a professional or have a computer for brain (pard included ), you're better off trying using normal methods + good judgement.

[paulg]

Some time ago Fred wrote that he used transfers in this auction:

1NT (3♣) ?

3♦=hearts, inv+
3♥=spades, inv+
3♠=diamonds, fg

You can extend a similar scheme to a relatively small number of auctions without too much work, including that mentioned.

It is normally easier to play that the displaced bid is game forcing although this puts a little more strain on the double.

Paul

[david_c]

akhare, on Apr 19 2009, 09:15 PM, said:

1♣ - (1♠) - 2♦ (alerted as transfer to ♥).

It might just be that they're playing "switch", where 2♦ shows hearts and 2♥ shows diamonds. More generally, after any overcall you can switch the bids in the two unbid suits. But that's not always sensible: a reasonable rule is "when the two switched bids would be at the same level", or "whenever they overcall in a black suit". Or maybe just in a couple of specific auctions.

I agree with whereagles about the effectiveness of this: it seems like an improvement, but not a huge one.

For what it's worth, this transfer is also a part of my Polish Club system: we play both 2♣ and 2♦ as transfers, and have to commit to the three-level if we want to show clubs. This only applies after a 1♠ overcall.

[the hog]

Looks like Rubensohl to me

[hanp]

I play switch after 1S overcalls.

[dake50]

If you like NT natural with stoppers and one scheme in all defensive interference, xfers always. 1) same meaning for our bids: values in xfer suit 2) F1 so no gimmick Leben/good-bad to remember is it on this time 3) keeping help-suit raises and source of tricks even lead-directs easily in our scheme to counter their obstruct 4) let alone big fit discovered or control showing xfer.

[fromageGB]

This is what I normally play after an overcall with one partner. The general rule is that bids from X and up are suit transfers (by suit transfers I mean 1♣ (1♠) X is a transfer to clubs, with 1NT natural) up to a transfer to 2 of the other major. So 2♦ is a transfer to 2♥ which can be left to play or followed with another forward going bid. We use a direct bid of 2 of the other major as showing specifically a 4 card suit in an invitational hand.

It seems to work for us. Being able to play suits as either to play or stronger has a great advantage. In this sequence, though, you do lose the the ability to make a normal weaker takeout double that allows opener to play in 1NT if he has a suitable hand without 4 hearts.

In other sequences (eg 1♥ (2♣) ?) this is not a downside, and if both majors have been bid (eg 1♠ (2♥) ?) it does enable you to make a transfer to 2 of your major to show a full strength raise to the 2 level as opposed to a direct raise which just shows 3 cards.

This latter difference is particularly important in a jump overcall situation, where we play transfers from X up to 3 of our suit : 1♥ (3♣) 3♥ is to play, but 1♥ (3♣) 3♦ is game invitational support.

We don't play 5 card suit transfers to the 1 level. 1♣ (1♦) 1♥ is our normal transfer Walsh with 4+ spades.