transfer advances

[bridgeguy2]

Hello

 

Tried to find something about this from many places, just couldn't find. Is this a secret to be kept inside the expert circles, or could someone offer some help? Trying to get a good description of transfer advances after our side overcalls.

 

How does it work?

Who plays and likes them?

When do they apply?

 

How about transfer advances if opponents interfere our openings? I know people like to play transfers after 1C opening, how about after other openings?

 

Thanks, all help is appreciated.

[joker_gib]

I've never played those kind of transfers and I'm also interested on how it works.

 

Is it really a big advantage because, playing tranfers, you allow room to opps who can double your transfer or bid your suit. (that's also why I hate transfer preempts)

 

Alain

[candybar]

http://www.bridgeguys.com/pdf/SmithTransfe...20advances'

 

www.bridgeguys.com/pdf/SmithTransferAdvances.pdf#search='transfer%20advances'

[joker_gib]

http://www.bridgeguys.com/pdf/SmithTransfe...20advances'

 

In that article the following example is given :

 

This structure works equally well to give you much-needed extra space at higher levels:!

RHO You LHO Partner - - 2♥* 3♣ Pass ?*

 

Weak two

 

Using Transfer Advances:3♦ = natural and forcing 3♥ = transfer to spades 3♠ = good hand with a club fit

 

Well, the question is : How do you ask a ♥ stopper to play 3NT ????

 

Alain

[inquiry]

I think it goes back at least as far as a series of Bridge World articles by Jeff Rubens on the Useful space principle (which discussed more than just transfer advances). I have those old bridge worlds somewhere. This is why they are often called Ruben transfers (I maybe mispelling Jeff's name), but I am pretty sure they predate his article by decades too.

 

The problem is would a new suit (after partner overcalls) be best played as forcing or non-forcing. If memory serves me well, Jeff concluded that suits at the same level were best if not forcing, and if at next level was best as forcing. But then he started dicussing the ideat that after an overcall (by parnter) starting at cue-bid, the bids are transfer advances... showing the next suit, and can be of the weakish up to forcing variety.

 

So that...

(1C)-1H-(Pass)-?

 

Here 1♠ is natural and forcing

2♣ is transfer to 2♦ and overcaller will not bid 2♦ with great hand...

2♦ is a transfer to 2♥ (sound raise), etc.

 

I am pretty sure you can find a good write up on it somewhere online. And there use to be a book(let) on Useful space principle by Jeff Rubens around.

[Guest Jlall]

Here are some places I like transfers:

 

-1C p anything

-1M X- ? starting with 1N (so we gain a constructive raise). Some people like it over 1m X starting with redouble as well.

-(1x) 1M (X) starting with redouble excluding 1N (1N always nat).

-2M-X starting with XX (3 of the suit 1 under is invite).

-(1x) 1M (p) starting with a cue or 1x (2y) p starting with cue.

[bridgeguy2]

Ok, thanks for all the responses.

 

I see there are some advantages in adopting some of these transfer structures.

 

Anyway...Browsing through CC's of some world class pairs, I didn't see any of them including nf responses after our side's overcalls. Yet Mike Lawrence recommends these in his book. You're now playing transfer advances, but there are many situations where you need to bid suits naturally. Do you prefer to play these as forcing or nf yet constructive, and play the transfer to pard's suit as sound raise/any unbiddable GF?

[helene_t]

Jeff Ruben presented some Master's Solvers problems that were quite hopeless without transfer advances and quite easy with transfer advances.

 

On the basis of those samples, it looked as if it was particularely useful when the opps open at the 3-level. Then again, Master's Solvers problems are probably not a statistically representative sample ;)

[whereagles]

That's very, very true: transfer advances are great, but after playing that for about 1 year, I had the chance to use it only 3 times. (Of which one pard forgot the system and we went down.. lol.)

[Free]

That's very, very true: transfer advances are great, but after playing that for about 1 year, I had the chance to use it only 3 times. (Of which one pard forgot the system and we went down.. lol.)

Only 3 times in a whole year???? Perhaps you or partner should overcall (or play) more :P

[Guest Jlall]

Browsing through CC's of some world class pairs, I didn't see any of them including nf responses after our side's overcalls.

That's odd, I'm pretty sure most north american experts play new suits as NF constructive (that is what is BWS, but there is a leaf with new suit forcing). Two of my regular partners, David Grainger and Josh Donn, both really like new suit forcing after an overcall. We've had some good results with it but I can't get used to it, and still think NF constructive is better.

[whereagles]

That's very, very true: transfer advances are great, but after playing that for about 1 year, I had the chance to use it only 3 times. (Of which one pard forgot the system and we went down.. lol.)

Only 3 times in a whole year???? Perhaps you or partner should overcall (or play) more ;)

We did play a lot and overcall even more. It's really not that frequent :P

[mikeh]

I have played a LOT of transfers, in many, many sequences.

 

Transfer advances of overcalls:

 

In my preferred method:

 

Transfers are on after a 1-level suit overcall if responder: passes, doubles (negative), raises to the 2-level or bids 1N.

 

Generally, the lowest transfer is a cue-bid of opener's suit.

 

The highest transfer is the suit below overcaller's suit.

 

so (1♦) 1♠ (1N) 2♦ is a transfer to ♥

 

2♥ would be a good raise to 2♠, or a 3 card limit

 

2♠ would be a weak raise to 2♠

 

Exception: if they double, then transfers start with redouble: this often buys a level:

 

(1♥) 1♠ (x) xx: transfer to 2♣

 

The transfer string can restart above overcaller's suit: in one partnership, we play transfer flowers :P

 

(1♦) 1♠ (P) 3♦ is a transfer to ♥, promising a fit-showing jump with both majors.

 

3♥ would be a transfer to 3♠, limit raise with 4 trump

 

3♠ is weak

 

Transfers are also on after a 2/1 overcall: (1♠) 2♦ (P) 2♠ is a transfer to ♣ (note, it makes no sense to use 2♠ as a transfer to NT here... you do not want the lead coming through the 2♠ bidder).

 

These bids come up quite often: on average at least once evrey couple of sessions.

 

 

 

After we Open:

 

I also play transfers if we open a suit and the opps double

 

You lose the redouble: it becomes a transfer, but this is almost never a loss. With a defensive, good hand, pass and double.

 

I like transfers after we open a preempt and the next opp doubles.

 

We use this to allow us two ways to raise:

 

3♦ (x) 4♣: this is a raise to 4♦, preserving captaincy for responder. Opener is NOT invited to use judgement.

 

3♦ (x) 4♦: this invites opener to use judgement should the opps bid on.

 

This is especially useful if you play wide-range preempts.

 

(The transfers start with redouble... if you have them dead to rights, pass and then double)

 

How about after a 10-12 1N, and a gf 2♦ response? We play transfers by opener here, to maximize the chances of right-siding high-level contracts.

 

I could go on (and on, and on, and...) but 'nuf said

[hrothgar]

That's very, very true: transfer advances are great, but after playing that for about 1 year, I had the chance to use it only 3 times. (Of which one pard forgot the system and we went down.. lol.)

Only 3 times in a whole year???? Perhaps you or partner should overcall (or play) more :P

We did play a lot and overcall even more. It's really not that frequent :rolleyes:

This is almost nonsensical....

 

Transfer advances apply on any hand where partner overcalls at the 2 level and RHO doesn't bid. Even if you don't have a hand worth taking an action (and there are LOTS of hands where you can say something), the negative inferences are still worth a lot.

[pclayton]

Browsing through CC's of some world class pairs, I didn't see any of them including nf responses after our side's overcalls.

That's odd, I'm pretty sure most north american experts play new suits as NF constructive (that is what is BWS, but there is a leaf with new suit forcing). Two of my regular partners, David Grainger and Josh Donn, both really like new suit forcing after an overcall. We've had some good results with it but I can't get used to it, and still think NF constructive is better.

I like our structure, and I think its optimal (assuming no xsfr advances):

 

1. After our one level ovecall, a one level call is a one round force (do you really need to play EXACTLY 1♠)?

 

2. After our one level overcall, a 2 level call is NF Constructive.

 

3. After our 2 level overcall (and higher), a new suit is forcing. We (and I'm sure many of you are the same) don't overcall at the 2 level with crap. Ergo, there's less of a reason to stop on a dime.

[Guest Jlall]

3. After our 2 level overcall (and higher), a new suit is forcing. We (and I'm sure many of you are the same) don't overcall at the 2 level with crap. Ergo, there's less of a reason to stop on a dime.

I agree that the overcaller (at the 2 level) usually has a soundish hand, but its more about letting responder bid with marginal hands opposite a pretty wide ranging bid that may produce a game opposite fit and still be able to avoid getting too high.

 

For instance with:

 

QJ9xxx xx Axxx x I would like to be able to bid 2S after 1H-2C-p and not have it be forcing. Obviously this hand can produce a game quite easily, but if pard must rebid and we don't have a good fit and we have half the deck or less, things can get out of hand.

 

That being said, there are many instances where I love having a forcing 2S on this auction. Basically I can go either way on the issue, but still prefer NF probably because I'm more used to it. If I had the above hand, I would bid a forcing 2S and hope for the best. If pard bids 2N or 3C it's not the end of the world. But the point of the NF response is to add flexibility and safety for RESPONDER, not for the 2 level overcaller.

[han]

I like to play that if partner overcalls over a preempt, my new suit is forcing. Else it is constructive but non-forcing. So (2H)-2S-p-3C is forcing, but (1S)-2C-p-2H is not forcing.

 

Of course, in the auction given by Jlall, (1H)-2C one plays transfers: 2H shows spades, constructive or better. His posts here seem sensible so I am sure that he plays this too.

[Guest Jlall]

Yes my post was referring to methods not playing transfers obviously, else the hand is not a problem. I was replying to Phil's methods when he does not play transfer responses.

[pclayton]

Yup - haven't made the leap yet.

 

Right now the only transfer sequence is over a negative double. The suit below shows a constructive raise, direct raise is junk and a redouble takes the place of the suit below.

 

We're in a house cleaning mode now, so I dont see us adding anything for at least a few months.

[whereagles]

Transfer advances apply on any hand where partner overcalls at the 2 level and RHO doesn't bid. Even if you don't have a hand worth taking an action (and there are LOTS of hands where you can say something), the negative inferences are still worth a lot.

For your information, I was playing transfer advances at ANY level. Believe it or not, it came up 3 times in about 1000 hands. THREE TIMES.

[han]

I have played transfers in competition with Ben since.. maybe August. Granted, I've played far too much online bridge but I'd estimate at least 20 auctions with transfers, likely many more. I've posted some victories here, and tried to hide the times that I made a mistake.

 

Although Ben's methods include more transfers than is usual, I find 3 in a year hard to believe.