aguahombre Posted September 9, 2011 Report Share Posted September 9, 2011 Interesting dismissal of the premise that the hand which is to be declarer often should not be giving extra, unneeded information to the defense; especially when in doing so he might pass up the level to which his side belongs and take away useful probing space. It might not be your style, but I doubt it is as stupid as you claim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 Transfer + 4D seems like an ok start. The rest depends on methods, I guess. You can also play the odds and bid a straight 6 lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted September 11, 2011 Report Share Posted September 11, 2011 I was recently persuaded to change to a system of responding to 2NT where all responses are basically game forcing. I was initially somewhat dubious about this for the obvious reason mikeh states: that you can't transfer out to 3M and play there. However, we bid a load of randomly dealt hands and found the system gained overall. The weak take-out hand is (i) very rare, (ii) doesn't always improve the contract and (iii) rarely changes to minus into a plus, it more commonly reduces the size of the minus (so it's more useful at matchpoints) and (iv) when partner breaks the transfer you then go minus anyway. Against those small losses, the new system hugely improves slam bidding - although we do play a lot of artificial continuations to (try and) take full advantage of the extra space we have. In particular, you can make a mild slam try below 4M with a known 8-card fit to go back to. I do think this is only worthwhile if you put a lot of time into the continuations, and it's obviously a trade-off of gains & losses but I think those who are objecting even to the idea that you might play a transfer as game forcing haven't done the analysis that we have. p.s. we only play this in response to 'good 20' or stronger 2NT bids, not after e.g. 2S 2NT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted September 11, 2011 Report Share Posted September 11, 2011 sorry hit reply rather than edit Anyway, on this hand we could transfer to spades, if partner showed 3 or 4-card support but denied a decent side 5-card suit, I would bid 4C, showing a (possibly light) slam try with 5-6 spades and exactly 4 diamonds. Partner will know that rounded controls are now good, and lower honours aren't. If partner bid 3NT to deny a fit, I would just retransfer back to spades. I could alternatively bid 4D, slam try with 6 spades, opposite which partner will distinguish between min/medium/great hands, but here I think finding out about the fit at the 3-level is more useful; opposite a 4D slam try he's not supposed to worry too much about his spade holding but look at his hand in general. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdeegan Posted September 19, 2011 Report Share Posted September 19, 2011 3h and then 4s over the forced 3s showing 6s and a mild slam try(no texas). :P Same here. Oswald Jacoby played it this way. 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.