[semeai]

(1♠) 1N (P) 2♥

What does it (or should it) mean?

A) It really is a transfer to spades (hey, maybe you have ♠QJ10987)

B) Some sort of stopper ask (with what responses?)

C) Game forcing stayman

D) It shows hearts. And a desire to hog the hand. At the two level.

E) Other

F) Get a new partner

I'm looking mostly for the oh-****-my-regular-partner-just-bid-this answer (and this regular partner is not the sort to just forget about transfers opposite 1NT, and knows you play systems-on). Theoretical answers aimed at "what it should be" are also welcome.

[This thread inspired by, but otherwise unrelated to, the laws & rulings thread with this auction. Go there for any legal discussion.]

[kenrexford]

This situation is somewhat dependent upon what the opponents are playing. As a general rule, I usually play that a "cuebid" of an opponent's suit is natural if the suit could be 4-card (or shorter) but artificial if 5+. Thus, if the 1♠ opening promises 4+ (canape or natural 4-card majors), this is a transfer. If 5+, this is a cuebid (if the agreement is system on).

As a cuebid, if 2♣ is Stayman (systems on), then this is not Stayman. The default is "Western Cue," meaniong asking for a stopper.

If the 1NT bidder promises a stopper, then 2♥ asks for a "good stopper." If 1NT promises a bolster only, then 2♥ asks for a stopper or better. Fairly natural after that, except that I would play that "completing the transfer" denies and shows no clear direction.

If I discussed this sequence (and the parallel sequence involving a 2♦ "transfer" to hearts), I would probably prefer this call as a flag for clubs (showing clubs and invitational+). 2♠ would then show the same thing with diamonds. Thus:



(1♥)-1NT-(P)-?

2♣ = Stayman
2♦ = clubs
2♥ = spades
2♠ = diamonds



(1♠)-1NT-(P)-?

2♣ = Stayman
2♦ = hearts
2♥ = clubs
2♠ = diamonds

[Phil]

Someone suggested on Bridgewinners (Debbie Rosenberg maybe) that this should be natural!

[semeai]

 kenrexford, on 2012-July-25, 10:51, said:

The default is "Western Cue," meaniong asking for a stopper.

A nice well-thought-out discussion. Let's say we haven't discussed it further, so we'll go with this "default" meaning. Would you ever bid this? What hands would you bid it on?

<thinks> I suppose if you don't have a spade splinter in your NT followups, you might well try it on such a hand (if you expect partner to reason similarly). Maybe you'd bid this on a 1-3-(54) sort of hand, in particular.

 Phil, on 2012-July-25, 10:52, said:

Someone suggested on Bridgewinners (Debbie Rosenberg maybe) that this should be natural!

A vote for D!

[kenrexford]

 semeai, on 2012-July-25, 11:03, said:

A nice well-thought-out discussion. Let's say we haven't discussed it further, so we'll go with this "default" meaning. Would you ever bid this? What hands would you bid it on?

<thinks> I suppose if you don't have a spade splinter in your NT followups, you might well try it on such a hand (if you expect partner to reason similarly). Maybe you'd bid this on a 1-3-(54) sort of hand, in particular.



A vote for D!

With my defaults, this becomes rather cute. 2♠ by Responder would hae shown one or both minors usuay a weak version. The cue-transfer covers a lot of territory but features 0-3 hearts. With no spade help (and hence the need to cue), this usually features a lot of minor cards, whether one-suited or two-suited, but relatively balanced is obviously possible (e.g., xxx-xxx-Axx-AKxx?). BTW -- I do have a "spade splinter" in my toolkit.

[gnasher]

In different partnerships I have played this as:
- Spades
- Spades unless advancer bids again, in which case it shows a three-suiter.
- Exactly invitational with hearts.

[kenrexford]

 gnasher, on 2012-July-25, 11:33, said:

In different partnerships I have played this as:
...
- Exactly invitational with hearts.

I like this meaning a lot.

[aguahombre]

As Ken stated, sort of Western Cue is probably the default.

Invite+, and 1NT overcaller may accept the transfer with a questionable spade stop, or bid 2NT or 3NT.

It might be antiquated, but it keeps all the rest of the "systems on" including an artificial 2NT ---and gets the invite without a major out of the 2C advance (thus not giving information away when we don't need information about majors).

[Zelandakh]

Some options:-

1. Stayman (2♣ is now available as a transfer)
2. Clubs (as above but now 2♠ is Stayman; or alternatively in combination with 2♣ Stayman (then either 2♠ or 2NT can show diamonds))
3. Hearts and invitational values (probably better is hearts and a "light" invite)
4. Spades (surely the worst meaning)
5. Take-out of spades
6. INV+ NT raise without a spade stopper
7. Minor suit Stayman (the extra step turns out to be rather useful)
8. anything else which just happens to be an awkward hand type in your system

[Vampyr]

 Phil, on 2012-July-25, 10:52, said:

Someone suggested on Bridgewinners (Debbie Rosenberg maybe) that this should be natural!

I play this, but not that it is exactly invitational; that is a good idea that I am going to consider.

[SteveMoe]

Playing systems on (direct 2N is Lebensohl), the transfer is most useful as an invitation to 3N, asking partner's disposition about ♠s. If partner accepts the transfer, s/he denies a stopper. Then 2N by responder shows a full stopper. 3♠ by advancer would then show a partial stop showing a hand for 3N or 4m...

This way, 2♣ Stayman then 2N can show an invite with a partial stopper.