[32519]

Playing a 15-17 HCP NT range, I see more and more players "Super Accepting" whenever partner makes a Jacoby Transfer bid into either major and you hold 4-cards in the suit being transferred to. Do you/would you Super Accept with a 4333 distribution?

[Cyberyeti]

Not sure if it makes any difference, I play a weak no trump. I super accept and show a minimum with a max 4333, and don't super accept with a minimum.

[mikeh]

32519, on 2013-March-25, 15:17, said:

Playing a 15-17 HCP NT range, I see more and more players "Super Accepting" whenever partner makes a Jacoby Transfer bid into either major and you hold 4-cards in the suit being transferred to. Do you/would you Super Accept with a 4333 distribution?

It depends.

I would certainly be less aggressive with the super-accept with 4333: I'd need to be super-max, but I want partner to draw inferences when I fail to super-accept, so I wouldn't be comfortable with any 'rule' that even a prime 17 count, with controls, shouldn't super-accept.

There will be 17 counts that I would have upgraded out of 1N with 4432 or 5332 shape, that I have in effect slightly downgraded already by opening 1N. Hands with lots of Aces and Kings, and some spot cards, for example. A10xx KJx AQx K10x, I can't imagine simply accepting a transfer to spades.

[aguahombre]

No, I wouldn't. I need a doubleton + four trumps ---something that evaluates to 18 in support of the major.

There are plenty of very good players who like to super-accept with different hands; my answer is not their answer, and I respect their style. We also have only one super-accept (2m+1) because of Walsh Relays and because we want responder to be able to make natural rebids at the 3-level after a transfer to spades.

[mike777]

32519, on 2013-March-25, 15:17, said:

Playing a 15-17 HCP NT range, I see more and more players "Super Accepting" whenever partner makes a Jacoby Transfer bid into either major and you hold 4-cards in the suit being transferred to. Do you/would you Super Accept with a 4333 distribution?

yes, with 2nt shows 4 card support, non-minimum, no useful doubleton, very frequently 4333.

[aguahombre]

mike777, on 2013-March-25, 17:04, said:

yes, with 2nt shows 4 card support, non-minimum, no useful doubleton, very frequently 4333.

And how do we determine that the doubleton is not useful at the time we super-accept? I will concede to the corollary --the 4333 hands will not have a useful doubleton.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

You can use the 2NT Super-Accept to show your 4 3 3 3 .

[Siegmund]

For me, never.

However, I very rarely superaccept at all (and if I do, always with 2M+1, not with crazy spacewasting jumps to 3M). Solidly in the camp that it's only justifyable if you feel you have an 18+ hand now and are ashamed of opening only 1NT.

[yunling]

I superaccept with 4333 distribution only if the suit is heart. I never do it with spades.

[lycier]

yes,if non-minimum for my hand,I 'd like 2nt as 4333 with denied wasted doubletons.

[Cyberyeti]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-March-25, 19:53, said:

You can use the 2NT Super-Accept to show your 4 3 3 3 .

Depends on your methods, if you break to a long suit holding on a max, bid 3 of your suit with a minimum as we do, 2N can be used with a max where your other 4 card suit is not one you want to show or 4333. Clearly this happens more often opposite a weak NT but is still valuable opposite say AKQx, AK, xxxx, Jxx when partner transfers to spades.

[han]

Only if I have a good hand.

[fromageGB]

I always super-accept with 2M+1 (eg 1NT 2♥! 2NT) when 4333. I don't think it matters being 4333 unless partner is a marginal 5{332}, in which case he will bid his doubleton. I just rebid 3M with a mirrored doubleton 4{432} or 4333, so he knows to pass with a marginal.

Edit : more explanation : this is a by-product of avoiding mirrored doubletons with a marginal 7/8 5332 shape.
2M+1 = transfer break with 4333 or most 4{332} shapes, but with doubleton in the transfer suit I super-accept with 3M. That way he knows to pass with a marginal 5233 with mirrored doubleton in that suit. The transfer suit has to get special treatment because opener will play the hand. If opener always bid 2M+1, and responder had a marginal hand with doubleton transfer suit, and bid it to show that suit, this clashes with signing off with a retransfer when he is weak.

[fromageGB]

With regard to my above post, perhaps I should explain that 1NT is 15/16 (not 17) so there is no need to distinguish on grounds of strength.

[TylerE]

Yea, sure, 4333 is fine. I think those super-accepting on 15, even with like a 4432, are looney.

[CSGibson]

I super accept when I can picture lots of typical hands for partner that will make game, but not invite. If I'm 4-3-3-3, I have to have controls and a concentration of values that I can show, helping partner evaluate if his hoped for shortage is working.

[jillybean]

Siegmund, on 2013-March-25, 21:07, said:

For me, never.

However, I very rarely superaccept at all (and if I do, always with 2M+1, not with crazy spacewasting jumps to 3M). Solidly in the camp that it's only justifyable if you feel you have an 18+ hand now and are ashamed of opening only 1NT.

What do you think of using the super accept to show a second suit. 1N 2H 3D super accept in spades, solid diamond suit.

[Free]

The main point of super accepting is to reach game when partner plans to signoff in 2M. Whenever he plans to invite or bid game, your super accepts are quite useless, unless you get to borderline slam hands.

So it depends on how you see things. Personally I only super accept with a max hand, 4+M and not a 4333. In my experience I haven't missed many games, and I also haven't bid many games which don't have any play. A 4333 doesn't add much trick potential. A minimum 5M332 or 4M432 on the other hand may have potential, so these hands are borderline imo.

[EricK]

On Monday, my partner super-accepted with a small doubleton in my suit. Irrelevant to this thread, I know - but I felt I had to tell somebody.

[gnasher]

I prefer a style where you break the transfer on almost any hand with 4-card support, including most 4333s. The benefits are:
- It makes the opponents' life harder when they can make a partscore, or even a game.
- It helps responder to judge when he's on the margin between a game-invitation and a game-force.
- It helps with slam investigations.
- It leads to a less revealing auctions when responder was planning to show a second suit but now doesn't need to.
- It helps us to find games that we would have missed otherwise, typically when responder has a two-suiter but not enough to invite game.

It seems to me that these benefits easily outweigh the downsides of this style. When we have a nine-card fit it's rare that we make exactly eight tricks and the opponents can't make anything themselves or won't compete. There is a bit of information leakage because they know that opener has four trumps rather than three, but that doesn't often seem to matter.

I wouldn't want to play a method where opener is obliged to reveal more detailed shape information. Most of the time responder isn't going to care about opener's doubleton, but the opponents will nearly always be interested in this information.