[jetkro]

Hi,

Can anyone give me some information about using transfers to advance partner's takeout double, assuming that this treatment is in use at all?

Jerome.

[wank]

i never heard of it and i basically don't see a point to it.

[nullve]

Some play Transfer lenbensohl over (2x[=PRE])-X-(P). Advancer can then show his suits more cheaply on slammish hands at the cost of no longer being able to invite in clubs.

[Kaitlyn S]

I don't like the idea.

(A) You have the well-defined hand hidden.

(B) The opening lead (of the bid suit) comes through the hand that is likely to have high cards in the suit.

[Phil]

Heard of it, but largely have rejected it.

Seems like a good way to wrongside contracts for no tangible gain.

[paulg]

I think many would play them if you were permitted to redouble partner's takeout double.

[1eyedjack]

I like them. regularly play them. Assuming we are talking jump advances starting with cue.

I take the view that right-siding the contract takes second priority to finding the right contract.

[Tramticket]

I play transfer advances with one partner, responding to an an overcall, but not in response to a take-out double.

The loss of a 1S reponse if opponents open 1H and partner doubles would seem to be a big price to pay.

[GrahamJson]

I used to play transfer responses from the level of 2 of the doubled suit upwards. So, for example, after (1H)-X-(Pass)- 2H shows spades, 2S clubs and 3C diamonds. Minimum bids (1S, 2C and 2D) are natural and other bids such as 3H can have other meanings, e.g. Balanced, no stop.

This method has several advantages. Responder can bid on to show extra values or a second suit, or a stop. So, for example, after the auction above, following 2H and a 2S bid from the doubler responder can bid 2NT to show about 11, balanced with spades and a stop. 3NT would show a stronger hand, 3H would be similar but without a stop.

Overall this method should give many advantages and I would like to report that it produced a lot or great scores, unfortunately I can't recall ever actually using it. Either responder was not strong enough (although it doesn't require a particularly strong hand, maybe 8+) or third hand made a nuisance of himself by bidding something annoying.

In summary in theory it has several advantages and perhaps deserves to be played more widely. However it does need detailed discussion between partners in order to agree the precise meaning of continuations.

[Vampyr]

Tramticket, on 2016-December-24, 06:21, said:

The loss of a 1S reponse if opponents open 1H and partner doubles would seem to be a big price to pay.

Playing the transfers starting with 1♠ would be kind of bonkers.

Anyway I have never played this, but I do play (and quite like) transfer responses when they double.

Probably the more transfers you play the better.

[msjennifer]

I have read a lot about them but did not like idea.Besides it will lead to innumerable alerts and extend the time.The director will penalize such a time wasting pair ruthlessly.Besides,I do not know if the treatment is allowed by the WBF.

[Phil]

1eyedjack, on 2016-December-24, 04:43, said:

I take the view that right-siding the contract takes second priority to finding the right contract.

Well, OK, please provide an example.

[Tramticket]

GrahamJson, on 2016-December-24, 08:18, said:

I used to play transfer responses from the level of 2 of the doubled suit upwards. So, for example, after (1H)-X-(Pass)- 2H shows spades, 2S clubs and 3C diamonds. Minimum bids (1S, 2C and 2D) are natural and other bids such as 3H can have other meanings, e.g. Balanced, no stop.

This method has several advantages. Responder can bid on to show extra values or a second suit, or a stop. So, for example, after the auction above, following 2H and a 2S bid from the doubler responder can bid 2NT to show about 11, balanced with spades and a stop. 3NT would show a stronger hand, 3H would be similar but without a stop.

Overall this method should give many advantages and I would like to report that it produced a lot or great scores, unfortunately I can't recall ever actually using it. Either responder was not strong enough (although it doesn't require a particularly strong hand, maybe 8+) or third hand made a nuisance of himself by bidding something annoying.

In summary in theory it has several advantages and perhaps deserves to be played more widely. However it does need detailed discussion between partners in order to agree the precise meaning of continuations.

This sounds reasonable. But if the opening was (say) 1D? How would you advance with 4-4 in the majors and a few values?

[GrahamJson]

I guess you would bid 2D and then 2S over partner's 2H, if that is what he bids. This is of course one of the disadvantages of the method, as you cannot stop in 2H.

[sfi]

msjennifer, on 2016-December-24, 09:54, said:

I have read a lot about them but did not like idea.Besides it will lead to innumerable alerts and extend the time.The director will penalize such a time wasting pair ruthlessly.Besides,I do not know if the treatment is allowed by the WBF.

The WBF doesn't forbid much, and almost nothing constructive that isn't an opening bid. Having lots of alerts doesn't need to slow the game down - most time is spent on trying to work out what to do rather than querying the opponents' system. Besides, ruling that a pair with lots of alerts is wasting time would be an odd decision, to say the least.

[spotlight7]

Herbert negatives are played by some after TO doubles.


Bidding the next higher suit shows weakness and not shape.

[Zelandakh]

GrahamJson, on 2016-December-24, 15:35, said:

I guess you would bid 2D and then 2S over partner's 2H, if that is what he bids. This is of course one of the disadvantages of the method, as you cannot stop in 2H.

Nor can those that play the cue as forcing to suit agreement, which is a very popular method.