Do you play switch here ?

[benlessard]

If your double is mostly take-out does switch is an improvement here ?

 

2Nt = natural

3C = diamonds

3D = clubs

 

Is any1 playing 2nt artificial ?

[broze]

I, with many others, play 2NT as a 4 card spade limit raise.

[Free]

Switch is only useful after a black suit interference of another rank (1m-n♠ and 1M-n♣), because you give more options to the unbid Major which is most important as opposed to the unbid minor. Playing Switch after 1m-nOm is foolish because ♠ would get more options at the cost of ♥, while both Majors are equally important. Transfers can be a good alternative after 1♦-n♣ though. After 1M-nOM you have a similar situation: both minors are equally 'important', so there's no point in preferring one over the other imo. Transfers could be possible (including 2NT transfer) at the cost of an extra possibility to raise opener's suit or a balanced invite.

 

After 1♠-(2♥) we use 2NT to show an INV+ with 4 card fit and we're not considering to change that at the moment.

[benlessard]

Switch is only useful after a black suit interference of another rank (1m-n♠ and 1M-n♣), because you give more options to the unbid Major which is most important as opposed to the unbid minor. Playing Switch after 1m-nOm is foolish because ♠ would get more options at the cost of ♥, while both Majors are equally important. Transfers can be a good alternative after 1♦-n♣ though. After 1M-nOM you have a similar situation: both minors are equally 'important', so there's no point in preferring one over the other imo. Transfers could be possible (including 2NT transfer) at the cost of an extra possibility to raise opener's suit or a balanced invite.

 

After 1♠-(2♥) we use 2NT to show an INV+ with 4 card fit and we're not considering to change that at the moment.

 

I disagree, imo the main gain is not because the M is more important than the minor, its because of the extra signoff.

 

1D--(2C)--??

 

switching allow you to bid S and stop in 2S. This is a huge plus imo.

 

The cost is you lose this sequence

 

1D--(2C)--2H (showing H)--(P)

2S (punting or nat)

 

However since with both M responder can double its not a big loss.

[gnasher]

Is any1 playing 2nt artificial ?

I play 2NT, 3♣ and 3♦ as transfers.

 

When was the last time you gained from bidding a natural 2NT in this sequence?

[Zelandakh]

In was going to write something along the same lines as Andy. You seem to get just what you want by playing 2NT=♣; 3♣=♦; 3♦ = 3 card limit+; 3♥ = 4 card limit+. Or reverse the last 2 steps if you prefer. If you really want that natural 2NT then I suppose another alternative would be to rope double into the transfers, so that X = clubs or (semi-)balanced without heart stop and 2NT = natural.

[dake50]

In was going to write something along the same lines as Andy. You seem to get just what you want by playing 2NT=♣; 3♣=♦; 3♦ = 3 card limit+; 3♥ = 4 card limit+. Or reverse the last 2 steps if you prefer. If you really want that natural 2NT then I suppose another alternative would be to rope double into the transfers, so that X = clubs or (semi-)balanced without heart stop and 2NT = natural.

 

Agree Zelandakh. Use transfers as he suggests. X-> clubs or exploring. Transfer Raise + Q-bid then support

to distinguish slammy myself or good if partner may be slammy.

I like transfers in competition mostly for just these auctions.

WE DISCUSS TRANSFERS, THEN OUR BIDS ARE ALWAYS CLEAR.

[benlessard]

Thanks for your answers, In my reg partnership we do play transfers starting at 2Nt here but our double of 2H and higher are cooperative so we can live without 2nt natural. However I do think 2nt natural is more useful than having two type of limit raises, IMO the 4th trumps is mostly useful when declarer has a stiff H and borderline values he can bid 4S and hope for a dummy reversal other than that its unlikely the 4th trumps is going to help me in the bidding (maybe it depend on how often the opps are going to bid 4H in front of you).

 

Does 3H as a limit and 3D as a transfer to 3nt make sense ?? It give partner option to repeat great spades to rightside 3Nt or to make a slammish 3H bid. (maybe reversing is better = 3D limit and 3H transfer to 3nt but i dont think so)

 

We play that transfer and returning in partner suit show around 11pts and 2 card support agree ?

[Zelandakh]

We play that transfer and returning in partner suit show around 11pts and 2 card support agree ?

Certainly playable. You might also treat this sequence as, effectively, a fit non-jump with real (3+) support and a side suit. I dislike the idea of 3♦ = transfer to 3NT and 3♥ = limit+ enormously. Reversing them is clearly better but even then it seems preferable to use X followed by 3♥ for that. I personally think that differentiating trump length is very useful; if you do not then you could profitably use the spare 3♥ bid to get a mixed raise.

[benlessard]

Certainly playable. You might also treat this sequence as, effectively, a fit non-jump with real (3+) support and a side suit. I dislike the idea of 3♦ = transfer to 3NT and 3♥ = limit+ enormously. Reversing them is clearly better but even then it seems preferable to use X followed by 3♥ for that. I personally think that differentiating trump length is very useful; if you do not then you could profitably use the spare 3♥ bid to get a mixed raise.

Double followed by 3H is IMO normally usuful for a GF 2344,23(53),22(54) with a lousy 5m and no stoppers.

 

When is the 4th trump making all the difference ? contested auction ?

 

if its in uncountested I could probably play 3D as limit with 3 or 4, and 3H says if you got 4 i want to play game.

[MickyB]

if its in uncountested I could probably play 3D as limit with 3 or 4, and 3H says if you got 4 i want to play game.

 

What if you want to play game opposite a 3-card LR but not opposite a 4-card LR?

[Zelandakh]

When is the 4th trump making all the difference ? contested auction ?

It is already a contested auction. Further bidding from the opponents would not be a surprise here so best if we prepare the ground for it when that is reasonably possible.

[Finch]

In one partnership I play what has already been described ie. 2NT = clubs, 3C = diamonds, 3D = 3-card raise, 3H = 4-card raise.

If you don't like distinguishing between 3 & 4 card raises (I do) then it's also worthwhile to distinguish instead between inv raise and FG raise

 

In the other partnership I just play 2NT as a good 4-card raise. That partner and the first one argue about the relative merits of the two methods i.e. whether the extra space you gain from bidding 2NT with your raise is worth it for not being able to transfer with the minor-suited hands. I would say it is 'inconclusive'. The 4-card raise is much more common than the transfer hands, but the latter are much harder to bid when they come up.