thebiker Posted May 12, 2010 Report Share Posted May 12, 2010 One partner and I play Rubensohl in the following situation after 1NT is overcalled 1NT (2X) 2NT upwards are transfers - Rubensohl style So 1NT (2S) 2NT Trf to 3C 3C Trf to 3D 3D Trf to 3H etcI have always played that in the Rubensohl did not apply if 1NT was passed by responder and then 4th hand protected ie 1NT (P) P (2S) sayP (P) ? 2NT competitive - both minors 3C or 3D natural I thought that this was our agreement and also the way the majority of players would play in this situation Recently partner told me that we had no such agreement and that standard Rubensohl transfers should still apply in this situation. Clearly we alone have to sort our agreement out, but I would be interested to know the views of other players? My main reasons for playing as above are:(1) We gain the use of 2NT as a competitive bid (2) by playing 3C and 3D as natural we get the benefit of the overcaller having to lead away from their holdings Thank you in advance for your input/views Brian Keablealias "thebiker" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted May 12, 2010 Report Share Posted May 12, 2010 Agree with you, it should not apply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
straube Posted May 12, 2010 Report Share Posted May 12, 2010 I agree with you. It does seem though that 2N should be 2-places to play...over their 2M balance anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted May 13, 2010 Report Share Posted May 13, 2010 I don't see the benefit of the balancer having to lead. Against a strong NT, balancer should have a weak hand, they're betting on their partner to be sitting over the NT hand with most of their side's points. It doesn't pay to balance with a good hand, because most of your points are sitting under the strong NT hand, reducing their value. So if you're going to compete, it's still a good idea to get opener to declare, so the strong opponent has to lead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgr Posted May 13, 2010 Report Share Posted May 13, 2010 1NT (P) P (2S) sayP (P) ? 2NT competitive - both minors 3C or 3D natural I play this..and DBL=4c♥ and a minor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebiker Posted May 13, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 13, 2010 QUOTE] barmar Posted on May 12 2010, 10:24 PM I don't see the benefit of the balancer having to lead. Against a strong NT, balancer should have a weak hand, they're betting on their partner to be sitting over the NT hand with most of their side's points. It doesn't pay to balance with a good hand, because most of your points are sitting under the strong NT hand, reducing their value. So if you're going to compete, it's still a good idea to get opener to declare, so the strong opponent has to lead I should have pointed out in the original post that I normally play weak no trump= thus if 4th hand balances and second hand comes back in, it is probably an advantage to have the balancer leading away from his hand regardsBrian Keablealias "the biker"[ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.