[chasetb]

Recently, my Precision partner and I have been talking about playing a Transfer Precision, and while I'm a tad reluctant at present (I don't want him or myself to learn anything new until after we get 1st at the NAP regional qualifier), I do feel that it wouldn't be a bad idea to at least try it in 3rd or 4th seat. Here's my thinking:
1♦ = 0-7 any or 8-10(11), 5+ ♥
1♥ = 8-10(11), 5+ ♠
1♠ = 8-10(11), bal
1NT = 8-10(11), 5+ ♣
2♣ = 8-10(11), 5+ ♦
2♦, 2♥, 2♠, 2NT = Unusual positive, singleton in next suit (2NT = ♦)

The real question is about 1♦ possibly being a positive with Hearts. After running through some biding, it seems to fit fairly well (though in a place or two I had to bump the 5-7 w/ 5+ Hearts to another bid). Interference doesn't seem to be a problem either over 1♣-1♦ (in theory anyway). What do other people think, and if you play a transfer precision what do you play? Also, as a passed hand what should bids 3♣ and higher be used for? Thanks for replies.

[olien]

I like to know if the auction is GF or not ASAP. Makes the later auctions easier.

but, I do like transfer precision much more than standard natural responses.

[mattias]

We play

1♦ 0-7
1♥ 8-10 bal
1♠ 8-10 5+♥
1NT 8-10 5+♠
2m 8-10 5+ unbal
2♥ 8-9 4441, 2nt asks
2♠ 10-11 4441, 2nt asks
3x 5-7 good onesuiter

Not really transfers, but clubs are already rightsided after 1♣. It also fits well with our responses by an unpassed hand.

[akhare]

chasetb, on 2011-September-26, 23:18, said:

Recently, my Precision partner and I have been talking about playing a Transfer Precision, and while I'm a tad reluctant at present (I don't want him or myself to learn anything new until after we get 1st at the NAP regional qualifier), I do feel that it wouldn't be a bad idea to at least try it in 3rd or 4th seat. Here's my thinking:
1♦ = 0-7 any or 8-10(11), 5+ ♥
1♥ = 8-10(11), 5+ ♠
1♠ = 8-10(11), bal
1NT = 8-10(11), 5+ ♣
2♣ = 8-10(11), 5+ ♦
2♦, 2♥, 2♠, 2NT = Unusual positive, singleton in next suit (2NT = ♦)

The basic premise is pretty good and you can improve things with ever further with:

1♦ = 0-7 any
1♥ = 8-10(11), 5+ ♠
1♠ = 8-10(11), bal or ♣ -> 1N asks, now 2♣ = clubs, else Stayman type responses
1NT = 8-10(11), Majors
2♣ = 8-10(11), 5+ ♦
2♦ -> 8-10, 5+ ♥
2♥ -> Three suited, short major (4441, 5440)
2♠ -> Three suited, short minor(4441, 5440)

With some tweaks, you can likely play the same in 1 and 2nd as well...

[mikestar13]

A scheme I have used in some Precision partnerships:

1♦=negative
1♥=5+♠
1♠=balanced or 4-4-4-1
1NT=5+♦
2♣=5+♣
2♦=5+♥

After 1♣-1♠, 1NT asks and 2♣ shows the three-suiter and other bids are as if in response to Stayman.

After 1♣-1NT, 2♣ asks for a 4-card major..

After 1♣-2♣, 2♦ asks for a 4-card major.

[brian_m]

Our scheme is the same for any seat

1♦ = any 0-7
1♥ = 8+, 5+♠
1♠ = 8+ balanced (ALL balanced positives, no upper limit)
1NT = 8+, 5+♣
2♣ = 8+, 5+♦
2♦ = 8+, 5+♥
2♥ = 8-11 or 16+, any 4441, 2♠ then asks for suit below singleton, 2NT = ♣, jump one level if 16+
2♠ = 8+, touching 5-5 (♣+♠ count as touching)
2NT = 8+, non-touching 5-5
3 any = 12-15, suit below singleton.

We use the transfer into the suit (or 1NT over 1♠) as beta, and 2♣ over 1♠ asks for both range and four card majors.


The idea of combining the negative and ♥ positive into 1♦ is interesting, but we use a tweaked Cambridge 1♥ to cater for opener's 4441 shapes and also allow 2 HCP ranges for balanced hands, and I'm not sure I could fold the idea of 1♦ also being a ♥ positive into that, not without some major changes anyway.

[dake50]

This should be easier as partner has neg, semi-positive(5-7),
or max-pass(by your opening minimums).
Now the fit auctions show just like precision when unpassed.
I suggest losing the 1D-neg with 2- or 3-passes before
1C opener; let 0-4 show next round.

[rbforster]

Another idea to consider, especially if you open light like one can in precision in 1st/2nd, is to raise the strength of the 1C opener in 3rd/4th. For example, if you open a 16+ club and 10-15 suited hands in 1st/2nd, you only have 0-9 hands left to show by responder after P-1C. Then it might make sense to open a stronger club, say 18+ in 3rd/4th, so at least now you can show positive responses with 7-9 instead of just 9.

[steve2005]

Have rethought this problem. It makes some sense to have 1♣ stronger (say 2 pts but at least 1) and responses coressponding lighter. So for me 1♣ shows 18+ unbalanced or 19+ balanced. I have intermediates openings 10-15 but will assume here 11-15

my 2 cents:
1♦: 0-5 hcp
1♥: 6-10 hcp 5+ ♠
1♠: 6-10 hcp 5+ ♥
1NT: 6-10 hcp 5+ ♣
2♣: 6-10 hcp 5+ ♦
2♦: 9-10 hcp balanced
2♥: 6-10 hcp any 4441 hand
2♠: 6-8 hcp balanced
2NT: transfer 4-5 hcp 7 Clubs
3♣: transfer 4-5 hcp 7 Diamonds
3♦: transfer 4-5 hcp 7 Hearts
3♥: transfer 4-5 hcp 7 Spades

[rbforster]

Just to follow up on OP's suggestion, I play a relay precision where 1♣-1♦ is hearts GF or any weak. It works pretty well, but requires a lot of artificial follow ups to hand the weak hands tolerably.

Precision has a hard time finding the best partials compared to natural since it wasted at least the first two steps of bidding. If you thought a negative auction was quite likely after P-1♣, say due to light openings, you should certainly consider adjusting your strong club range. If you don't open light and partner may have 10-12 points as a PH, I wouldn't bother adding the adjustment since now the 8-12 range of positives responses will still be reasonably frequent.

[straube]

Meckwell uses transfers similarly, but look at opener's rebids...

1C-1H, 1S (responder possibly shows spades while opener shows hearts)

1C-1S, 2C (responder shows hearts while opener shows spades)

1C-2C, 2D (responder shows diamonds while opener shows hearts)

They are apparently not concerned about getting opener to play responder's suit so much as showing suits as economically as possible. After all, bids that show a fit should consume more room than those that don't.

It is probably more useful to think of Meckwell's responses as ciphers (bids denoting a different suit) than as transfers (bids showing 1-under with expectation that partner will accept the transfer).

I think 1C-1D as hearts or 0-7 is flawed because

1) bidding is difficult enough after a 0-7 response and this range is likely to be very frequent for passed hands. Why overload the bid with GF heart hands as well? How would you separate these hands from 0-7 heart hands (especially in competition)? Like the Impossible Negative, this is a bad idea.

2) If 1C-1D, 1H shows 4+ hearts then opener is unlikely to be accepting the transfer opposite a GF heart response (i.e. only when there is a super fit) so the idea of transfer here is somewhat pointless.

I think RobF makes a good point about adjusting your point requirements for 3rd and 4th seat. Not sure, but the last I knew Meckwell used something like this for passed hand responses...

1D-0-7
1H-S positive
1S-H positive
1N-C positive
2C-D positive
2D-8-10 balanced
etc

1H appears under-utilized and 2D over-utilized. 2D prevents opener from patterning out, but it does let opener frequently declare. In any case, these are poor responses unless they are coupled with their rebids.

[rbforster]

straube, on 2011-October-10, 23:59, said:

I think 1C-1D as hearts or 0-7 is flawed because

1) bidding is difficult enough after a 0-7 response and this range is likely to be very frequent for passed hands. Why overload the bid with GF heart hands as well? How would you separate these hands from 0-7 heart hands (especially in competition)? Like the Impossible Negative, this is a bad idea.

2) If 1C-1D, 1H shows 4+ hearts then opener is unlikely to be accepting the transfer opposite a GF heart response (i.e. only when there is a super fit) so the idea of transfer here is somewhat pointless.

Much as I like 1♣-1♦ as hearts GF or weak (my preferred precision variant), it makes less sense in 3rd/4th. This is because it does overload the bidding for that auction and lead to less accurate part-scores than a purely weak 1♦ response. The advantage in 1st/2nd is that you stay low on the GF hands and get to resolve your relays one step lower than standard relay precision, which gives you more accurate slam investigations, but that's much much less of a priority opposite a PH.

Speaking generally about the "♥ GF or weak", interference is less of an issue than you might think since the response is ~90% weak. When they interfere, they are usually bailing you out of an uncontested mediocre part score auction, and the GF hands don't have a hard time acting in an obvious way later on. My continuation after 1C-1D, 1H is catchall and limited by opener. 1C-1D-1H-1S is any weak hand, while higher bids show the GF hands with hearts.

If I were to think about what I would want in a 3rd/4th seat precision context, I think what you want is a transfer set of responses geared towards allowing relays by very strong opener opposite a semipositive responder. You don't need to be super economical about space, because responder's range is already pretty limited and you're mostly showing shape to opener to so he can evaluate slam prospects.

[helene_t]

Agusaris and I play almost the same as brian_m but we use the transfer accept to ask for the number of controls. I would rather use the transfer accept to ask for exact shape and other bids as asking bids. I think opener often needs to know the shape before he can decide if he needs to know about specific suits or the number of controls or keycards.

[Zelandakh]

rbforster, on 2011-October-11, 02:39, said:

If I were to think about what I would want in a 3rd/4th seat precision context, I think what you want is a transfer set of responses geared towards allowing relays by very strong opener opposite a semipositive responder. You don't need to be super economical about space, because responder's range is already pretty limited and you're mostly showing shape to opener to so he can evaluate slam prospects.

Or you can just use your normal relay structure and skip the step that asks for extra strength at the end of shape resolution.

[straube]

rbforster, on 2011-October-11, 02:39, said:

Much as I like 1♣-1♦ as hearts GF or weak (my preferred precision variant), it makes less sense in 3rd/4th. This is because it does overload the bidding for that auction and lead to less accurate part-scores than a purely weak 1♦ response. The advantage in 1st/2nd is that you stay low on the GF hands and get to resolve your relays one step lower than standard relay precision, which gives you more accurate slam investigations, but that's much much less of a priority opposite a PH.

Speaking generally about the "♥ GF or weak", interference is less of an issue than you might think since the response is ~90% weak. When they interfere, they are usually bailing you out of an uncontested mediocre part score auction, and the GF hands don't have a hard time acting in an obvious way later on. My continuation after 1C-1D, 1H is catchall and limited by opener. 1C-1D-1H-1S is any weak hand, while higher bids show the GF hands with hearts.

If I were to think about what I would want in a 3rd/4th seat precision context, I think what you want is a transfer set of responses geared towards allowing relays by very strong opener opposite a semipositive responder. You don't need to be super economical about space, because responder's range is already pretty limited and you're mostly showing shape to opener to so he can evaluate slam prospects.

Hm. My answer assumed the OP was playing a Precision variant but not relays. I also assumed the OP played 1C-1D, 1H as natural. With relays, I would organize the responses very differently. We play...

1D-GF, balanced or unbalanced with a major
1H-any semipositive
.....1S-opener asks responder to relay shape
1S-any double negative
1N+ various GF

and do so for third and fourth seats as well.

[rbforster]

Zelandakh, on 2011-October-11, 03:41, said:

Or you can just use your normal relay structure and skip the step that asks for extra strength at the end of shape resolution.

My normal system doesn't have a relay structure for semipositive strength hands, and those that do (like TOSR) and start with 1♦ negative usually have their shape resolution 1-2 steps higher than for the GF hands due to spending all the low level space to sort out what strength responder has. I was thinking of something like:

P - 1♣ -?

1♦ 5+ hearts semipositive. Opener relays with 1♥ and extras, or bids naturally with a minimum. 2♥ is a minimum raise for example.
1♥ 5+ spades semipositive. As above.
1♠ double negative or balanced semipositive. Opener bids NF 1NT with most minimums (then strong NT systems), or 2♣ artificial with a very strong hand
1N 5+ clubs semipositive. As above
2♣ 5+ diamonds semipositive. As above
2♦+ rare GF passed hands, maybe similar transfers only one full level up?

[straube]

rbforster, on 2011-October-11, 10:59, said:

My normal system doesn't have a relay structure for semipositive strength hands, and those that do (like TOSR) and start with 1♦ negative usually have their shape resolution 1-2 steps higher than for the GF hands due to spending all the low level space to sort out what strength responder has. I was thinking of something like:

P - 1♣ -?

1♦ 5+ hearts semipositive. Opener relays with 1♥ and extras, or bids naturally with a minimum. 2♥ is a minimum raise for example.
1♥ 5+ spades semipositive. As above.
1♠ double negative or balanced semipositive. Opener bids NF 1NT with most minimums (then strong NT systems), or 2♣ artificial with a very strong hand
1N 5+ clubs semipositive. As above
2♣ 5+ diamonds semipositive. As above
2♦+ rare GF passed hands, maybe similar transfers only one full level up?

I don't think that's workable. The 1D response would be much much less frequent than the 1S response. Basically, the 1S response is handling too many hand types.

After our double negative 1S response, we use...

1C-1S
.....1N-bal or semibalanced
.....2C-staymanish
..........2D-hearts
..........2H-spades
..........2S-no major
.....2D-hearts
.....2H-spades
.....2S-minors or diamonds
.....2N-23-24
.....etc

Would not like to also cater to 5-7 balanced hands

[PrecisionL]

akhare, on 2011-September-27, 00:23, said:

The basic premise is pretty good and you can improve things with ever further with:

1♦ = 0-7 any
1♥ = 8-10(11), 5+ ♠
1♠ = 8-10(11), bal or ♣ -> 1N asks, now 2♣ = clubs, else Stayman type responses
1NT = 8-10(11), Majors
2♣ = 8-10(11), 5+ ♦
2♦ -> 8-10, 5+ ♥
2♥ -> Three suited, short major (4441, 5440)
2♠ -> Three suited, short minor(4441, 5440)

With some tweaks, you can likely play the same in 1 and 2nd as well...

I would adjust this very good scheme to approach what Keylime and I play:

1♥ = 4+ ♠ and 8+ hcp, G.F., OR 11-14 hcp & balanced (rebid 1NT over 1♠ relay)
1♠ = 4+ ♥ and 8+ hcp, G.F.
1NT = Majors (5-4 or better) & 8 hcp or 4441 with a minor suit singleton & 11+ hcp
2♣ = one or both minors and 8+ hcp (no 4-cd major)
2♦ = 8-10 hcp & balanced (Rodwell's best idea)
2♥ = Choose one: 5♥332 / 6♥322, or 3-suited, 4441 and 11+ hcp
2♠ = Chose one: 5♠332 / 6♠322, or 3-suited, 5440 with a 5-cd minor
2NT = 15+ hcp

[Venom]

Back to the now 4-decade old Forcing Club system problem of how to avoid wrong-siding a notrump contract after a 1 club opening, especially when responder has a balanced 8 to 10.

Two of the top ranked partnerships in the US seemed to have resolved this in different ways.

Grecham play a 1H response to 1C as showing any 8 to 11 hcp hand, and then have an elaborate set of rebids and relays to specify various hand shapes and distribution. However, they do not appear to use that many (if any) asking bids.

R-M (aka Meckwell) use (as of 2006) a 2D response to show the balanced 8-10 hcp hand. Other positive responses are transfers that seem to be tied into letting them continue to use support, trump, and control asking bids (albeit modified) as well as to keep the bidding at approximately the same level as if playing standard precision responses to 1C. (This clicked in once I realized the patterns of sequences i was seeing in a FD system printout. which means that I am probably wrong.) Less important, I suspect, is the idea of using transfers to allows the 1 club opener to be declarer more often, although this might be the case.

The reason for changing the responses to 1C in 3rd-4th hand is not yet clear to me. I suspect that modifying the responses will just screw up the reason for having the original set of responses (i.e.: to address the problem of the balanced 8-10 hcp hand.) You can more easily afford to have the hand "wrong-sided" when responder has a balanced 11-13, opened in some partnerships. Maybe I am just overly attracted to asking bids.


DHL: aka. Double !