Development on the 2NT rebid in T-Walsh

[joker_gib]

Hi all!

 

For those who are playing transfer walsh, what are your developments on the 2NT rebid ?

 

1♣ = all balanced hands excepted those with 5♦

 

1♣ 1♦ = 4 cards ♥ +

2NT (18-19) ?

 

1♣ 1♥= 4 cards ♠ +

2NT (18-19) ?

 

Thanks in advance !

[kenrexford]

Wildly curious...

 

Does T-Walsh make this sequence functionally different from the standard Walsh 2NT rebid?

[helene_t]

If opener would have accepted the transfer with 3-card support, you don't need a checkback. So you could play 3♣ and 3♦ both as to play.

[sheepman]

1♣-1♦-?

 

1♥ = (1)2-3♥, minimum

1♠ = natural, unbalanced

1N = 17-19 bal, (1)2-3♥

2♣ = Natural

2♦ = Natural, 16+, F1

2♥ = min bal w/4♥, min unbal w/3♥

2N = 16+, 6♣/3♥ OR 5♣/4♥, F1

3♥ = 13-15, unbal w/4♥, suggests concentrated suits + singelton

[dicklont]

I don't play T-walsh but for my prefered method I believe it makes no difference.

 

2NT rebid shows 18/19 with a balanced hand and it could have a 4-card fit in partners suit. Therefore 2NT is forcing.

 

With a subminimal hand responder will rebid his suit, the T-walsh pair would re-transfer off course. Only in this sequence you can finish below game level.

 

With a minimum or stronger hand responder bids 3♣ (checkback), shows another suit (natural) or bids 3/4/6 NT.

[joker_gib]

If opener would have accepted the transfer with 3-card support, you don't need a checkback. So you could play 3♣ and 3♦ both as to play.

It's not the case, opener gives strength first (18-19) and can still have 3 cards support....

 

I suppose that the most effective way is to play a structure with transfers which allows you to play 3M. As I don't want to reinvent the wheel, I'm asking the wonderful people of thsi wonderful forum ..... :P

[joker_gib]

Wildly curious...

 

Does T-Walsh make this sequence functionally different from the standard Walsh 2NT rebid?

Not really but pay attention that a hands with ♦ longer than ♣ are also opened 1♣ ! (3-4)-4-2, (2-4)-4-3

[pclayton]

After 1♣ - 1♦, Matt and I used to play 2N as a strong heart raise, but we shifted the raise to 2♠ to make it parallel with 1♣ - 1♥ - 2N.

 

1♣ - 1♦ - 2N is now a spade mini-splinter.

 

This works well.

[pclayton]

Wildly curious...

 

Does T-Walsh make this sequence functionally different from the standard Walsh 2NT rebid?

Why yes, yes it does!

 

There are a few varieties, but a popular one is 1♣ - 1♦ (hearts) - 1♥ simply shows a weak NT type hand (or many minimums).

 

1♣ - 1♦ - 1N show the 17+ - 19 balanced.

 

Perhaps the biggest advantage to this method is that you seldom get overboard when responding with very weak hands to 1♣.

 

Edited: Do any top T-Walsh pairs really play a 2N rebid as 18-19? Even if you play that 1♣-1♦-1♥ shows 3 like the Italians do, they have either a 2♣ or 2♦ opener to show the 18-19 point hands.

[BillHiggin]

I have seen two distinct styles of T-Walsh (and see replies here possibly representing each)

 

Style 1 (seems common in Northern Europe):

Simple acceptance of transfer shows 3 card support.

 

Style 2 :

Simple acceptance shows minimum usually balanced hand (may be similar strength in a 4-4-4-1 or 5-4-3-1 hand with shortness in responders suit).

 

Style 2 would normally rebid 1N to show 17-19 HCP balanced whereas Style 1 would need 1N to show the minimum balanced hand with less than 3 card support.

 

Since the OP referenced a 2N rebid as showing 18-19, it appears (to me) that Style 1 must be intended.

[han]

We rebid 1NT instead of 2NT with the strong balanced hands and use 2NT for other purposes. The downside is that we don't promise 3-card support when we complete the transfer.

[mikeh]

We rebid 1NT instead of 2NT with the strong balanced hands and use 2NT for other purposes. The downside is that we don't promise 3-card support when we complete the transfer.

That's my preference, and while I have had limited experience playing T-Walsh, I have yet to see a downside.

 

We use 2N as the BWS nightmare hand: 1♣ 1♦ 2N shows typically a 6331 or a 6322 with 6 clubs and 3♥s and gf values. It hasn't come up yet, so I can't tell you how well it works in practice :(

 

But having the 1N rebid show 17-19 (when played with a 14-16 1NT) or 18-19 has worked very well, especially since, as is very common these days, we strain to respond to 1♣.

[kgr]

I accept transfer with 3 card support.

2NT is 18-19 and can have 3-card support.

After 2NT we play transfers.

[dbsboy]

Playing 3-card acceptance transfer was what I originally did.

 

But I wanted 2N as a special convention so I played 2D = Genuine Reverse or 18-19 Balanced.

 

And 2N=FG with Clubs (may have support then) or a Jump to 3C without 3 Card Trump Support and 3C=a Jump to 3C with 3 card Trump Support, can signoff in 3M

 

Now I think 1M as minimum anything looks better

IF 1N=17-19 and even a 3-3-5-2 shape....so 1D can promise an unbalanced hand

and there is a lot of room to investigate onwards

 

And I could continue using my 2N/3C scheme. :P

[jvage]

Edited: Do any top T-Walsh pairs really play a 2N rebid as 18-19? Even if you play that 1♣-1♦-1♥ shows 3 like the Italians do, they have either a 2♣ or 2♦ opener to show the 18-19 point hands.

The Norwegian pair Brogeland-Lindqvist (who won the butler in addition to the European championship in Pau) does, as do the players on Norways Junior and Womens team (the 2 other open pairs don't play T-Walsh). As mentioned by other posters the T-Walsh methods popular in Norway are different from what most posters here use in that a simple acceptance shows 3(4). It seems there is no standard solution to 18-19 hands with 3 cards support, some just accepts the transfer while others (including B-L) rebids 2NT. After the natural 2NT repeated transfers is the most popular method, also used by B-L (I know their system fairly well, since I have played the same methods partnering Lindqvist).

 

John

[joker_gib]

After the natural 2NT repeated transfers is the most popular method, also used by B-L (I know their system fairly well, since I have played the same methods partnering Lindqvist).

Hi John!

 

Repeated transfers are what I'm interested in !

 

Do you always re-transfer with 5 cards in the major ? If you show a second suit, do you have 5M ?

 

Could you post the detailed developments ?

[jvage]

This is copied and pasted directly from B-L's supplementary sheets from Pau (I just fixed the suit-symbols), it should answer most of your questions. As mentioned earlier they rebid 2NT with (17)18-19 even with 3 card support. As you see they use transfers after the 2NT rebid even after other openings than 1♣ (no original transfer).

 

Note 2: Transfers after 2NT rebid

1m – 1y

2NT

• Transfers on 3-level and to both majors on 4-level. No Splinter!

o Transfers to 3♦, always accept

o Transfers to responders suit accept with 2card

o 1♣ - 1♥ - 2NT - 3♦: Opener makes a preference between ♥and ♠, 3♥may be 3 card

o 1♣ - 1♠ - 2NT - 3♠: Both minors, in search for the best game, OR may be stronger

o Jump to 4y for play 4 in that M, while 3y followed by 4 in that M is slamish (1♣ - 1♥ - 4♦ and 1♦ - 1♠ - 2NT - 4♦ is to play with both Majors)

o Jump to 4♣ is Natural slamish

 

1♥ – 1♠

2NT

• Transfers on 3-level. Minor on 4-level is Splinter with ♠ as trump!

o Transfers to 3♦, always accept

o Transfers to responders suit accept with 2card

o Jump to 4♥ and 4♠ to play, while 3♦/♥, followed by 4♥/♠is slamish

 

John

[jvage]

Do you always re-transfer with 5 cards in the major ? If you show a second suit, do you have 5M ?

Since this is not explicit in the notes I can try to answer this myself.

 

Yes, normally.

 

No, in most sequences you will need to retransfer/rebid the major to show 5. For example after 1♣ - 1♦, 2NT:

3♦ - 3♥ - 3♠ shows 45(+) (system geeks will want to revert the 3♠/NT rebids)

3♥ - 3♠ - 3NT shows 44

 

I have not discussed with neither Espen L. nor any other partner how minor-suit rebids work, so I am honestly not sure wether say 1♣ - 1♥, 2NT - 3♣, 3♦ (forced) - 3NT could be made with only 44 in ♠/♦ (we always open 1♣ with 44 in the minors) or if it promise 5+ diamonds (I would guess it does). As in regular Walsh, with less than a gameforce responder would normally start by showing 4 spades before a longer minor, but facing a well-fitting 18-19 slam may still be in the picture.

 

John

[fromageGB]

I play a simple 1♣ 1♦ 1♥ is exactly 3 cards in hearts, and forcing, unlimited. Additional strength is shown later. So 1♣ 1♦ 2NT is 17-18 with less than 3 hearts. In response to this, John's method above is better than mine, but yes, a retransfer is possible.

[fromageGB]

One of the good things about this discussion board is how it gets you to talk situations over with your partner that you have just not considered together.

As a result we have now decided that after 1♣ 1♦ (showing hearts) 2NT, all bids are transfers so that :

3♣ 3♦ 3NT is slam invitational with 5 diamonds

3♦ shows 6 hearts, and

3♥ shows 4+ spades.  Responder has not denied holding 5 spades, as our treatment with a less than invitational hand with 5/5 in the majors is to initially show the hearts, so opener treats this in a Walsh-like fashion.  He bids 3♠ with a 3 card suit, bids 3NT with 2, and 4♠ with 4. Over 3♠ responder can convert to 3NT or 4♠ accordingly.