System loss?

[karlson]

[hv=d=w&s=sxxxhqxxdacajtxxx]133|100|Scoring: ?[/hv]

 

1♥ on your left, 2♦ by partner, pass on your right.

 

You've agreed transfer advances here, with 2♠ showing clubs. Your agreements are that 2♠ followed by 3♦ shows a constructive diamond raise with club values, and that partner accepts the transfer with most minimums (you're allowed to have a 3-count with 6 or 7 clubs).

 

If you bid 2♠, partner bids the expected 3♣. Feel free to comment on this hand, methods, and if scoring/vul matters.

 

Edit: posted the auction. Weird, thought i had it in with the hand.

[Apollo81]

posting the auction would help

[awm]

I think this is the standard "problem" with transfer advances. Basically there are three hand types with clubs you might want to show:

 

(1) Clubs and forcing.

(2) Clubs and invitational, but NF.

(3) Clubs and weak.

 

If you don't play transfers you can pick any one. Partner needs to know whether to always bid (1) or bid with any maximum (2) or virtually always pass (3).

 

Playing transfers, you more or less get to pick any two. If you pick (1+3) then partner pretty much always accepts the transfer and you bid on with the forcing hand. If you pick (1+2) then partner bids past the accept with a maximum and accepts the transfer with most minimums. If you pick (2+3) then partner uses the intervening step (2NT) with an accept of an invite and otherwise bids 3♣.

 

The "problem" with transfer advances is that a lot of people seem to think that transfers allow them to bid all three hand types and that's not really true. Of course, transfers are still better than non-transfers here, but not as much better as some people seem to think.

 

Anyways, given the hand and the methods I bid 3NT next. Maybe it's an overbid but I know partner will bid 3♣ on a quite good hand so I can't stomach a pass. Hopefully partner's two level overcalls are sound.

[Guest Jlall]

I would have just bid 2N over 2D.

[Apollo81]

I would have just bid 2N over 2D.

agree

[gnasher]

I agree with most of Adam's analysis, but not with the sequence he found himself following. If you're going to bid 3NT on this hand, transferring to clubs first seems a poor idea. With these major-suit holdings, I wouldn't want to suggest 5♣ as an alternative contract.

 

With this particular sequence, you can, in fact, split the range into three, as long as one of them is a game-force. I can't see any need to transfer on as bad a hand as suggested by the OP, so I'd make the options constructive, invitational and game-forcing. With no interest opposite a non-game-force, opener bids 3♣ or 3♦; with interest opposite an invitational hand he bids 2NT; with interest opposite all three he goes past 3♦.

[Impact]

A lot depends on what you expect for a two-level overcall, but assuming WJO the 2D bid should be pretty decent and since you hold the DA, it tends to restrict the options for good suit (and block the suit in the play!).

 

Nonetheless, whether it works or not, these values are commensurate with a "game-going" hand ie at least invitational and even if tit does not make I will force with such a hand: transfer to C and then bid 3NT.

 

That also has advantages as a plan in case opener has an extreme hand: if overcaller has C support he will have some clue what to do...

 

regards