[HardVector]

After the bidding has gone: (3d)-3n-(p)-?, what is the best way to continue? Should you still play 4c as Stayman with 4d/4h as transfers?, or should you play something more natural? After (p)-p-(3d)-3n-(p)-, does it change?

Our agreements are that 3n could be either a strong balanced hand with diamonds well stopped, or some hand that is likely to take 9 tricks (semi-gambling).

[pescetom]

Stayman isn't much use here so I guess you could play clubs as natural with slam interest. But I would just keep your normal agreements.

[dsLawsd]

I have not given this thought because usually you pass.
But Texas seems possible or use 4♣ or 4♦to ask aces or exclusion asking. Could 4♥/4♠ show two suited slam interest??
I suspect most hands in this category come up with too low a frequency to think about it.
Great question!

[etha]

given you might want to ask for aces and you might want quantitative you could use the convention everyone hates.

4♣= gerber


4nt = quantitative


rest transfers.


No idea if gerber is any better than stayman here maybe I cld try a sim but 3nt is a pretty movable feast and hard to pin down.



Which makes me think you might well want a bid which says did you bid 3nt off running clubs and a stop or do you have a strong balanced hand. So maybe 4♣ shd ask this.

[Fluffy]

The structure I use is this:

4♣: What do you have? ->
......4♦ = I have a balanced hand minimum
......4♥ = I have a balanced hand with extras
......4♠ = I have a big balance dhand
......4NT = I am gambling with a long suit


others are transfers.

[torgums]

When the strain is NT a jump to 4 !c is Gerber. Transfer bids are on. There is a problem when the level is 3NT and the solution is Super Gerber. 5!c is ace asking and when 2 aces are missing, 5 NT is to play. Otherwise 4 clubs is Stayman and transfers are on.

[farcar]

Got fedup going down in 3NT when other ganes were laydown
So I play this
3 any - 3NT -
4C - I have a 6+ card suit, please bid 4D and I will Pass or correct
4D - Stayman, bid 4NT if you don't have a 4+ card major
4H/4S/5C/5D - natural, mild slam try

Very useful

[HardVector]

So the consensus seems to be with keeping transfers on. So what do you do with this?

---

[msjennifer]

Sirs.After going through the various schemes proposed by the experts a few doubts arise. 1) Does the 3NT bid deny a 5+ card strong major suit as a source of tricks with the rest of the hand any 332 pattern and 8 tricks hoping to get one from partner For example a hand which falls short of a TOD? 2)Can it be a sort of gambling bid based upon a strong long club suit.? 3)Can it be a hand loaded with HCP ,no source of tricks.,possible singleton in one of the outside suits and having AKJX in the preemption suit? I am asking this as there was such a hand in the casual bridge involving world class players some 3/4 days back where the world champion overcalled 3NT.(of course they reached the PAR contract later.) If the answers to one or all of these is YES then in my personal imagination it is well nigh very difficult if not impossible to construct any responses as the level is far too high.IF the 3NT overcall can not be defined so as to fit only one or perhaps two of the possibilities how can anyone devise a majority acceptable and playable scheme of responses for various hand patterns that THE RESPONDER MAY HOLD.Else the responder shall remain stumped most of the time.With sincere apology to all the experts.--msjennifer.

[dsLawsd]

Having a partnership agreement no matter what it is seems important. The one thing we know is that partner has no strong interest in the majors else they would double. They either hold 2 stoppers or the Axx in diamonds so they can shut out the preempt suit in most cases.

Perhaps 4♣ asks for 3 card major fit and 4♦ ace asking?
4♥/♠ might show a 2 suithand with slam interest.
4 NT could be used as saying I am interested in a Club slam...

A good situation to run simulations on the computer to see the possible results.
again most of the time it is best to pass and stay out of partner's way without another game strain being available,,,

[etha]

 HardVector, on 2019-June-20, 08:40, said:

So the consensus seems to be with keeping transfers on. So what do you do with this?

---

Bid 4♥

[RuflRabbit]

If you're going to play transfers, you can use 4S ace-asking. 4C can be pick-a-major, asking 4 card suits up the line (my preference), or slam interest in whatever minor wasn't opened.

IMO, if you're going to spend the time to discuss this, it's worth talking about how you'd play it after a balancing 3NT. Here, the transfer principle may be key to protecting the notrumper from the opening lead. If you're playing option 3 above, you'd probably want to swap the 4C and 4D replies so that 4C transfers to hearts and 4D shows clubs.

RuflRabbit

[pescetom]

 farcar, on 2019-June-20, 07:47, said:

3 any - 3NT -
4C - I have a 6+ card suit, please bid 4D and I will Pass or correct
4D - Stayman, bid 4NT if you don't have a 4+ card major
4H/4S/5C/5D - natural, mild slam try

 RuflRabbit, on 2019-June-21, 07:36, said:

If you're going to play transfers, you can use 4S ace-asking. 4C can be pick-a-major, asking 4 card suits up the line (my preference), or slam interest in whatever minor wasn't opened.

An easier to remember scheme might be
4C = Stayman
4D = H
4H = S
4S = minor(s)
4N = Bkwd

[HardVector]

The whole reason I started this, is a disagreement I'm having with my partner. I think this is something that you should talk out with your partners. I mentioned in the beginning that partner's hand was strong and balanced or semi-gambling. Just as a hint, on this particular hand, partner is void in one of the majors. It's quite possible that playing in nt is the correct place, but it's also possible that it makes a grand slam in a major. I personally think that playing transfers when partner does NOT promise a balanced hand is silly. I think it's much more valuable to be able to make a 4d general cuebid indicating an exploration of other possibilities.

[RuflRabbit]

 HardVector, on 2019-June-21, 18:35, said:

The whole reason I started this, is a disagreement I'm having with my partner. I think this is something that you should talk out with your partners. I mentioned in the beginning that partner's hand was strong and balanced or semi-gambling. Just as a hint, on this particular hand, partner is void in one of the majors. It's quite possible that playing in nt is the correct place, but it's also possible that it makes a grand slam in a major. I personally think that playing transfers when partner does NOT promise a balanced hand is silly. I think it's much more valuable to be able to make a 4d general cuebid indicating an exploration of other possibilities.

FWIW, a little googling shows that sites such as Larry Cohen's include transfers and that systems on was the plurality choice in a bridgewinners poll, but I don't think either of those sources is assuming that the notrumper is likely to have a void. How do you see the auction unfolding after your general cuebid? (Maybe you could give some examples.) How will you tell partner that you don't want to play in their (likely) 6 card major, and can you do it at a reasonable level? Could you get out just as soon by rejecting the transfer, if you agreed on what that means?

RuflRabbit

[HardVector]

 RuflRabbit, on 2019-June-21, 19:56, said:

FWIW, a little googling shows that sites such as Larry Cohen's include transfers and that systems on was the plurality choice in a bridgewinners poll, but I don't think either of those sources is assuming that the notrumper is likely to have a void. How do you see the auction unfolding after your general cuebid? (Maybe you could give some examples.) How will you tell partner that you don't want to play in their (likely) 6 card major, and can you do it at a reasonable level? Could you get out just as soon by rejecting the transfer, if you agreed on what that means?

RuflRabbit

Frankly, I don't know. I have no good ideas on what to do after the 3n bid, that's why I was putting the question out there. After thinking about it for awhile, however, maybe transfers aren't so bad. I'd have to bid 4h followed by 5h, though, to show the hand I had.

[DinDIP]

Not sure what they are doing now but in the earl;y 2000s Rodwell and Meckstroth were playing this after a 3NT overcall of 3m:
4♣ = inquiry
4♦/4♥ = transfers, either to play or a strong slam try (need to agree whether new suits show shortness or length)

Over 4♣ the overcaller bid a little like Fluffy's scheme:
4♦ = normal BAL. Now 4M was NAT, a mild slam try.
4NT = very big BAL (say 21-23, assuming you don't play a 4NT overcall as NAT, as recommended by Kaplan). Over this 5♣ asked for suits and 5♦ and 5♥ were transfers
4M/5Om = NAT, long suit (my partners and I agree that six is enough for 4M but a good seven-card suit is needed for 5Om)

I've played this for many years and it has rarely come up; however, the idea of being able to make a NF slam try and stop in 4M is very sound theoretically.

[gszes]

 HardVector, on 2019-June-21, 23:33, said:

Frankly, I don't know. I have no good ideas on what to do after the 3n bid, that's why I was putting the question out there. After thinking about it for awhile, however, maybe transfers aren't so bad. I'd have to bid 4h followed by 5h, though, to show the hand I had.

4d 4h 4s = 55+ in majors = length or longer spades
4h 4s 5h = 55+ majors longer hearts

I would consider the power of the problem hand to be the absolute minimum to pull 3n with 55 distribution. The remainder of my favorite system is
4c = relay to 4d*
4d = transfer to hearts
4h = transfer to spades
4s = transfer to clubs
4n = quantitative 11-13
5c = 55+ clubs and hearts clubs longer than hearts
5d = gerber


*after the relay is accepted (4d)
4h 55 hearts and clubs hearts = or longer than clubs
4s 55 spades and clubs spades = or longer than clubs
4n quantitative 14-16
5c 55+ clubs and spades clubs longer than spades
5d quantitative 17-18
5h quantitative 19-20
5s quantitative 21-22