Help
Hi all,
I am looking for the modern treatment of transfer responses to a short club opening with 2/1. Have searched the web to no avail.
With the older version of this, opener rebid 1 of the transfer suit with 3+ cards and 1NT with 12-14 and < 3 cards in the transferred suit.
The updated version opener rebids 1 of the transferred suit with 2+ cards and 1NT with 18-19. This has obvious advantages. However, I am
unsure of the recommended continuations - so if anyone can point me to a source of information, I would much appreciate it - prefer not
to re-invent the wheel that others have so carefully crafted.
all the best,
jeannie
Page 1 of 1
updated transfer responses to short club 2/1
#2
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 77
- Joined: 2005-August-12
Posted 2012-August-14, 21:22
I've played it before - but in pickup partnerships (yes I know that's odd, but it's when I get to experiment with system ideas, obviously the other person's opinion too!). We didn't have much fancy system - just play as if the auction had started 1C-1M; 1NT. That's what they've shown (weak NT with 2-3M). Whatever system you like after a 1NT rebid (2 way checkback, Leong transfers) will work well. You even get to play the same system after 1C-1R; 1M/1NT. The only other bid which needs discussion is 1C-1D; 1H-1S: I'd have guessed this is 44 Majors and F1. Suddenly we'll play the right partscore with 44 Majors opposite a balanced opener with 4 Spades without having to rebid 1S with balanced hands. This is nice!
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,679
- Joined: 2008-April-06
Posted 2012-August-15, 06:56
I am no expert, but there are many treatments around. My impression is that these days it is more normal to have 4 card support completing at the 2 level or higher, and 2 or 3 card support completing the transfer unless stronger than the 1NT open, when you then rebid NT.
Continuations are the thing, though, and some use XYZ while I prefer a different use of the responder minor rebids as XYZ can wrong-side contracts. Design your own continuations.
Major considerations (pun intended) are how you describe 44xx, (54)xx and 55xx shaped hands of the 3 strength ranges - weak, invitational, and game, and distinguish between them. Similarly when you have just one major, how you show whether your single major is 4, 5 or 6 cards in length, and in all cases, whether weak, invitational, or game forcing. You can, if you try, do all this, with major fits played by opener, and with a major fit game invitation declined playing at the 2 level.
How do you want to play the 1♠ or 1NT response to 1♣? You get more flexibility by the use of the 1♠ response as a relay to discover whether opener is (semi)balanced, or has long clubs. Then after a 1NT rebid, you can have various continuations to show different invitational or better hand types. Use the 1NT response to show a holding that otherwise is difficult. For example, 1♣ 1NT for me shows a (54)xx hand which is weaker than invitational. Opener bids a 4 card major if he has one, else rebids 2♣ for responder to then transfer to the 5 card major.
One thing that is overlooked by most is the impact on the strength of the NT open. If you have good methods of finding major fits after a club open that you cannot do after a 1NT open, unless you are at least invitational, then you prefer to open 1♣ than 1NT. (At least, I do.) So my 1♣ open followed by completing the major transfer or replying 1NT in response to the 1♠ relay is 12-14, my 1NT open is 15/16, and 17 and higher start with 1♣. Why include the 17 count in the 1NT open when you can easily show a 17/18 hand by the sequences 1♣ 1♥ 1NT, or 1♣ 1♠ 2NT? Having a 15/16 NT with a 2 point range means that you no longer need a 2NT response (or responder rebid) as game invitational, which means that you can use stayman with weaker hands than those playing 15-17, because you can follow with 2NT to play if there is no major fit.
Another impact of the benefit of opening 1♣ on (semi)balanced hands is that you can then open 1♦ on hands that either have 6 diamonds (and rebid them) or have a singleton or void outside the diamond suit (rebid something else). The implications of the shortage 1♦ open can make bidding and play simpler, and because you are putting other hands into the 1♣ open that would in normal methods open 1♦ means that you get the benefits of finding the major fits when they exist.
So there are many related items here, and how you choose to handle these things, and the relative importance you assign to different aspects, affect how you choose to play transfer responses, and the continuations you use. Because it is a "system philosophy" thing, I don't think there is or should be a recommended package of bids. Sit down with your partner, decide what your objectives are, and design the sequences to suit.
Continuations are the thing, though, and some use XYZ while I prefer a different use of the responder minor rebids as XYZ can wrong-side contracts. Design your own continuations.
Major considerations (pun intended) are how you describe 44xx, (54)xx and 55xx shaped hands of the 3 strength ranges - weak, invitational, and game, and distinguish between them. Similarly when you have just one major, how you show whether your single major is 4, 5 or 6 cards in length, and in all cases, whether weak, invitational, or game forcing. You can, if you try, do all this, with major fits played by opener, and with a major fit game invitation declined playing at the 2 level.
How do you want to play the 1♠ or 1NT response to 1♣? You get more flexibility by the use of the 1♠ response as a relay to discover whether opener is (semi)balanced, or has long clubs. Then after a 1NT rebid, you can have various continuations to show different invitational or better hand types. Use the 1NT response to show a holding that otherwise is difficult. For example, 1♣ 1NT for me shows a (54)xx hand which is weaker than invitational. Opener bids a 4 card major if he has one, else rebids 2♣ for responder to then transfer to the 5 card major.
One thing that is overlooked by most is the impact on the strength of the NT open. If you have good methods of finding major fits after a club open that you cannot do after a 1NT open, unless you are at least invitational, then you prefer to open 1♣ than 1NT. (At least, I do.) So my 1♣ open followed by completing the major transfer or replying 1NT in response to the 1♠ relay is 12-14, my 1NT open is 15/16, and 17 and higher start with 1♣. Why include the 17 count in the 1NT open when you can easily show a 17/18 hand by the sequences 1♣ 1♥ 1NT, or 1♣ 1♠ 2NT? Having a 15/16 NT with a 2 point range means that you no longer need a 2NT response (or responder rebid) as game invitational, which means that you can use stayman with weaker hands than those playing 15-17, because you can follow with 2NT to play if there is no major fit.
Another impact of the benefit of opening 1♣ on (semi)balanced hands is that you can then open 1♦ on hands that either have 6 diamonds (and rebid them) or have a singleton or void outside the diamond suit (rebid something else). The implications of the shortage 1♦ open can make bidding and play simpler, and because you are putting other hands into the 1♣ open that would in normal methods open 1♦ means that you get the benefits of finding the major fits when they exist.
So there are many related items here, and how you choose to handle these things, and the relative importance you assign to different aspects, affect how you choose to play transfer responses, and the continuations you use. Because it is a "system philosophy" thing, I don't think there is or should be a recommended package of bids. Sit down with your partner, decide what your objectives are, and design the sequences to suit.
Page 1 of 1