4 suit transfers

[dickiegera]

[hv=pc=n&s=sa6h85daq5ckj8532&n=sqjhaq6dj762caq76&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1np2sp3cp3d]266|200[/hv]

 

2♠ was a transfer to ♣ and 3♣ was super acceptance.

 

3 ♦ was intended to be a cue bid however partner believes that it should have been a splinter

 

We arrived in 6♣ making. Spade and Heart finesse on, diamond not.

 

Question : Is 3♦ a cuebid or a splinter?

 

Thank you

[Finch]

It's whatever you have agreed it with your partner to mean.

I play it as showing a diamond suit (longer clubs than diamonds).

Some people play it as showing shortage.

Some people play it as showing values in the suit, initially looking to ensure all the suits are stopped for 3NT.

I'm not sure very many people play it as a cue bid, but that's also a possible agreement.

[A2Bob]

[hv=pc=n&s=sa6h85daq5ckj8532&n=sqjhaq6dj762caq76&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1np2sp3cp3d]266|200[/hv]

 

2♠ was a transfer to ♣ and 3♣ was super acceptance.

 

3 ♦ was intended to be a cue bid however partner believes that it should have been a splinter

 

We arrived in 6♣ making. Spade and Heart finesse on, diamond not.

 

Question : Is 3♦ a cuebid or a splinter?

 

Thank you

How can the 3!C bid be a superaccept when it is not a jump? I would consider it a regular accept.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

How can the 3!C bid be a superaccept when it is not a jump? I would consider it a regular accept.

S/he is playing 2NT! = no accept

and 3C! as "accept "

 

Others play 2NT! as a "preaccept"

and 3C! = no accept.

[dickiegera]

How can the 3!C bid be a superaccept when it is not a jump? I would consider it a regular accept.

 

 

We play reverse Gap. 2NT is non superaccept and 3♣ is superaccept, 3+ ♣ and an A,K or Q in Clubs

 

Thank You

[TWO4BRIDGE]

 

Question : Is 3♦ a cuebid or a splinter?

 

After an "accept", I would take it as a cuebid.

You have room to "jump" to show a splinter in any of the other suits.

EDIT: "Jumping" to show shortness is probably NOT a good idea.

The 3-level new suit bid would be better served as : Ctrl cue--"could be shortness".

 

After a "no accept", I would be looking for a NT game ( if i have the values ), and a 3-level new suit would show stop(s).

Edited March 14, 2011 by TWO4BRIDGE

[helene_t]

You could play it as natural as you have probably no other way of looking for a diamond fit while showing 5+ clubs. 3♥ and 3♠ probably wouldn't be natural, though, as a strong hand with 4M and longer minor would start with stayman.

 

I think the most common, and most useful, agreement it to play those bids as showing shortness, although with this particular south hand it would be nice to play it as a feature. If North has ♦K you may want to be in 6♣.

 

It is not true that a splinter hand can bid at the 4-level. The main purpose of showing shortness after a minor suit transfer is to tell opener that he will need a double stopper (or prospect of nine quick tricks) for 3NT, and otherwise 5m is likely to be better. Without shortness you just bid 3NT directly unless you have slam interest in which case you can probably afford to go beyond 3NT. So I think it is better to play the 3-level bids as showing shortness. To show a feature or a second suit you will have to bid at the 4-level then.

[blackshoe]

I've never heard of "reverse Gap", but I play those bids the same way dickie does. :ph34r:

[mike777]

[hv=pc=n&s=sa6h85daq5ckj8532&n=sqjhaq6dj762caq76&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1np2sp3cp3d]266|200[/hv]

 

2♠ was a transfer to ♣ and 3♣ was super acceptance.

 

3 ♦ was intended to be a cue bid however partner believes that it should have been a splinter

 

We arrived in 6♣ making. Spade and Heart finesse on, diamond not.

 

Question : Is 3♦ a cuebid or a splinter?

 

Thank you

 

 

I dont play 4 suit transfers but I would think in theory there should be a difference between, nonaccept, accept and super accept. Playing superaccept I would think you should be willing to go above the level of the suit to show something important.

 

I dont play transfers to clubs but I do play a forced relay to clubs (1nt=2nt) so partner cannot superaccept( wk with clubs or 3 suited hand) and I really never have this issue. In the suits(majors) where I do play transfers a super accept is always above the suit level that was transfered.

--

 

 

edit again I dont play 4 suit transfers but it seems if pard superaccepts with 3c he has told you very little and if pard often, very often bids 2nt then the weaker hand is declarer.

[P_Marlowe]

3D showes values.

 

Even after the super accept, it is not clear, which game, 3NT or 5C.

 

If responder has a splinter, he always can bid 4D.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

PS: Added after reading the followup posts - I would play 2NT as super

accept, but only because, I think this is slightly better, since in

case repsonder has the weak hand, the NT opener will be declarer.

[Free]

Many play that it's a splinter because it's quite frequent (you have 6+♣, so a singleton isn't rare at all) and it can help a lot to find sharp slams whily you stay below 3NT. With balanced slam invites you can just bid 4♣ and keep an entire level available for cuebids.

 

But when you don't have an agreement I think it should be interpreted as a control, not splinter.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Many play that it's a splinter because it's quite frequent (you have 6+♣, so a singleton isn't rare at all) and it can help a lot to find sharp slams whily you stay below 3NT. With balanced slam invites you can just bid 4♣ and keep an entire level available for cuebids.

 

But when you don't have an agreement I think it should be interpreted as a control, not splinter.

If you define a 3-level new suit bid exclusively as a splinter, then how would Responder make a control bid w/o shortness? I don't think you would want to "jump" .

 

That is why I think it should be defined as a "Ctrl bid--which could be shortness" .

[helene_t]

If you define a 3-level new suit bid exclusively as a splinter, then how would Responder make a control bid w/o shortness? I don't think you would want to "jump" .

 

That is why I think it should be defined as a "Ctrl bid--which could be shortness" .

A ctrl bid that could be shortness makes it impossible for opener to decide whether to bid 3NT.

 

With slam interest and no singleton just bid 4♣. Or some other 4-level bid if that is defined by partnership.

[1eyedjack]

If you define a 3-level new suit bid exclusively as a splinter, then how would Responder make a control bid w/o shortness? I don't think you would want to "jump" .

 

That is why I think it should be defined as a "Ctrl bid--which could be shortness" .

You could play that the first step above the long minor shows either (1) no shortage but desire to cue (not necessarily in that suit) or (2) a specific shortage. Other steps show specific shortages (incl 3N+, with bids above 3N showing the same shortage as 3N but stronger, with 3N being NF). I think it implicit that if responder has no shortage then he will have a desire to cue or show some slam interest, else would have just responded 3N.

 

Over the ambiguous step 1, opener bids 3N with wastage opposite the potential shortage, or otherwise cues. Possible 3S over 3H (with diamonds as trumps) could be last train to 3N implying lack of wastage opposite the potential shortage.

[1eyedjack]

I dont play 4 suit transfers but I would think in theory there should be a difference between, nonaccept, accept and super accept. Playing superaccept I would think you should be willing to go above the level of the suit to show something important.

 

Classically, you can't afford to go to the 4 level opposite a potential bust after a minor suit transfer the same way that you can afford to go to the 3 level opposite a potential bust after a 2-level major suit transfer.

 

You might, I suppose, by agreement insist that responder has some values for a transfer to a minor. Then you could safely use the rebids above 3-minor on some hands. You may then lose out on hands that have to pass 1N with shape that suggests pulling, but perhaps overall you might gain in the long run. Never really thought about that.

[Free]

~snip~ With balanced slam invites you can just bid 4♣ and keep an entire level available for cuebids.

If you define a 3-level new suit bid exclusively as a splinter, then how would Responder make a control bid w/o shortness? I don't think you would want to "jump" .

 

That is why I think it should be defined as a "Ctrl bid--which could be shortness" .

With balanced slam invite I meant 6322 or 7222... :rolleyes:

 

The suggestion to use the first step as multi-way is definitely better, but it adds more artificiality which some people don't want.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

I googled a few references.

 

1) Semantics: The "acceptance" whether the "gap" bid or 3m is sometimes referred to as a "super accept" = at least Honor-3rd or small-4th.... some said w/max... others had no max requirement.

 

2) There is no known advange of favoring the gap bid or 3m to show acceptance.... so need prior agreement.

 

3) After "acceptance", then a 3H! or 3S! bid by Responder shows shortness ( stiff or void ).

3D is not a shortness bid ( see next ).

 

4) The sequence: 1NT - 2S!( transfer to ♣ ) - 3C!( acceptance ) - 3D! ( can be used for the NO shortness hand ).

 

But 1NT - 2S! - 2NT! ( no acceptance ) - 3D! = for PASS, because Responder had a weak 5/5 in the minors ! !

 

5) NO reference showed cuebids at the 3-level.

 

6) With NO shortness:

....... Bridgeguys said to have Responder go GERBER ( or Minorwood ) over an acceptance ( They do not like 4NT as RKC when a minor is trumps ) .

....... Philip Alder said to "agree the minor" with a 4-level bid ( 4m ) and then use 4NT = RKC over a 4-level cuebid by Opener.

 

7) 1NT - 2S!/2NT!

any - 4NT = Quant.

[chasetb]

Some of what TWO4BRIDGE said is accurate.

 

1.)You should agree with partner what an "accept" of a minor actually entails. I prefer at least Qxx(xx) or Jxxx(x) and a non-minimum (all 17s, all 16s that aren't 4333). Any way you slice it, partner's hand accepts it.

 

2.)Again, have an agreement with partner. Sounds like you do.

 

3, 4, 5.)Some people play that 1NT-2♠;2NT-3♦ is weak with the minors, but that seems pointless. I play that 1NT-3♣ is weak with the minors, so that isn't needed. Therefore, it ALWAYS shows shortness. After all, with a strong Club hand that also is 4-3 in the majors (or 4-4 if 4-4-0-5), you can tell partner about your hand immediately as well as getting the stronger balanced hand to play it.

 

6.)Play Minorwood (4 of the trump suit regardless of acceptance is RKC). This is easy to remember, and frees up the 4♣ bid (if you transfer to Dia.) as showing the Club shortness.

 

7.) That's garbage, because it shouldn't be that way. I transfer to the minor, then bidd 3NT. This shows a hand with 13-15 HCP, and 4-5 controls (which yours is). If partner has any interest (which he might for 6♣ but not 6NT), he can ask for Aces. A hand with 6(5)+ Clubs and 16+ HCP should find out about Aces and set the contract, or just blast 6NT if 33-35 HCP.

[whereagles]

Question: Is 3♦ a cuebid or a splinter?

 

I normally see it defined as showing a stopper in diamonds. But yeah, it's whatever you agree with parnter.

 

If you haven't discussed anything, there's always the common sense meta-rule:

 

"Undiscussed bids are NATURAL." ;)

[Vampyr]

PS: Added after reading the followup posts - I would play 2NT as super

accept, but only because, I think this is slightly better, since in

case repsonder has the weak hand, the NT opener will be declarer.

 

On the other hand, playing this way you won't get to the (probable) best fit if responder has a weak hand with 5/5 minors.

[helene_t]

One advantage of playing acceptance (bidding responder's suit) as positive and 1st step as negative is that with a weak 5-5 in the minors, responder can bid 2NT. If opener then bids 3♣, it is likely to be a better contract than 3♦, so responder passes.

 

This also means that (I disagree with TWO4BRIDGE), 1NT-2♠-3♦ is not a weak hand with 5-5 minors.

 

An advantage of playing the first step as positive is that opener will be declarer whenever responder has an invitational hand. But then again, if you play the 1st step as negative, opener will be declarer when responder is weak.

[Ant590]

Wow - it's a good thing there aren't any downvotes.

 

With the exception of a few replies here, the amount of people stating that a particular method is standard or the correct way is frightening. A good rule of thumb with conventions and follow-ups in bridge is unless everyone plays it (e.g. 1NT opening is a limited balanced range), there is probably no standard (e.g. 2♦ openings).

 

Superaccepts: one style loses when responder has a weak hand with both minors, the other loses when responder has a weak single suited hand

 

Rebids: shortage wins when responder has no slam interest and wants to check the right contract beneath 3NT, natural wins when responder is dealt two-suiters and helps differentiate between 5m4M and 6m4M hands, cuebids win when responder has slam interest and wants to check on controls (although note with either of the other two approaches, responder can make a further move). As for which is the biggest loss, this depends on the rest of your 1NT structure, for instance I would argue that if you played direct 3-level bids as splinters, the return for shortage rebids after a minor transfer is lower.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

 

This also means that (I disagree with TWO4BRIDGE), 1NT-2♠-3♦ is not a weak hand with 5-5 minors.

 

I didn't show what you typed.

 

I showed ( from one of the references I found ):

1NT - 2S! ( transfer to Cl; long Cl, but could have the weak 5/5 minor hand )

2NT! ( no acceptance for Cl ) - 3D! ( the weak 5/5 minor hand assuming a better fit in Diam )

[helene_t]

sorry yes I should have included opener's rebid, my mistake.

 

Anyway, as I said, responder can bid 2NT with a weak hand with both minors. So

1NT-2♠

2NT*-3♦

 

is something else. For example diamond shortness if that is what you play.

 

*assuming 2NT is negative and 3♣ would have been positive

[blackshoe]

I do play, with my regular partner, that we "accept" by bidding the minor, and "reject" by bidding the intermediate strain. So 1NT-2NT-3♦ shows (usually) Hxx or better in diamonds, and 1NT-2NT-3♣ tends to deny such holdings. Now responder, holding a weak minor 5-5, passes 3♣. For us, 1NT-2♠-2NT-3♦ shows a strong hand with clubs and diamonds. We haven't discussed, and I have not thought much about, exactly what kind of hand this should show, perhaps a slam try in either minor, or perhaps responder's just trying to get to 3NT. Or, I suppose, we could agree it's diamond shortness. B-)