Transfers after 1D-X

[steve2005]

i'm sure ive seen system of transfers over takeout double of 1N here. Ive tried searching but u cant search on 1D(too small) so didn't have any luck

 

transfers over 1♣ double make a lot of sense and is easy to come up with a system that is nice

 

1♦ double a little more difficult. I think your gonna lose natural redouble. Anyone got a method?

 

if it makes a difference 1♦ is unbalanced

[straube]

We play transfers through 1N. Our 1S is bal, minors or weak diamonds. We play system on starting with 2C. There are probably lots of threads on 1D X.

[paulg]

We lose the natural redouble and use it as a transfer to hearts. Hasn't been a problem yet.

[JLOGIC]

like this a lot, its important to get the takeout Xer on lead as often as possible

[rbforster]

I never developed a fully fleshed out system over 1♦-X, but having worked hard on the 1M-X version, the "lost" XX hands pass and then double. If 3 hands have near opening values (in the case of a normal XX responder), you can bet 4th hand isn't sitting for the X and is taking it out to some cheap suit since they're nearly broke. So you've essentially got a situation where the opps are in a forcing auction, so you can safely pass and plan on bidding again later. This opens up a lot of options, systems-wise, for how to treat strongish hands by repsonder.

[Free]

We play an entire level of transfers, starting with the RDbl. The loss of the natural RDbl isn't that big imo, and there are other ways to penalize opps.

 

So:

RDbl = 4+♥

1♥ = 4+♠

1♠ = transfer to NT

1NT = transfer ♣, pretty much any strength

2♣ = good ♦ raise

2♦ = weak ♦ raise

[fromageGB]

So: ...

While over 1♣ (X) I play transfers with a 4+ card suit (twalsh "on"), after 1♦ (X) transfer (pass), how do you play? Jump completion with 4, completion with 2+, or what?

[Free]

Completion of a Major with a 3 card, jump completion with 4.

[paulg]

While over 1♣ (X) I play transfers with a 4+ card suit (twalsh "on"), after 1♦ (X) transfer (pass), how do you play? Jump completion with 4, completion with 2+, or what?

In general I think you should follow the same style that you play over 1♣-(X)-transfer.

[fromageGB]

Merci beaucoup. That's the great thing about the BBO forums, they give you new outlooks and ideas. Should be compulsory reading for all bridge players!

[kgr]

After 1♣-(P)-? => We play T-Walsh.

 

Playing T-Walsh it is easy to play a similar system after:

1x-(1D/H)-?

(with DBL is transfer to 1 over 1).

 

or after:

1C/D/H-(DBL)-

(with RDBL is transfer to 1 over 1).

 

=> I would recommend these transfers when playing T-walsh.

[steve2005]

Playing T-Walsh it is easy to play a similar system after:

1x-(1D/H)-?

(with RDBL is transfer to 1 over 1).

Its my understanding that under ACBL GCC conventional meanings may be given to redoubles and responses

(including free bids)

 

so you can use 1♦=♥ and 1♥=♠ etc. as these are free bids

[kgr]

After 1♣-(P)-? => We play T-Walsh.

 

Playing T-Walsh it is easy to play a similar system after:

1x-(1D/H)-?

(with RDBL DBL is transfer to 1 over 1).

Its my understanding that under ACBL GCC conventional meanings may be given to redoubles and responses

(including free bids)

 

so you can use 1♦=♥ and 1♥=♠ etc. as these are free bids

I obviously did mean DBL iso RDBL

(and all other 1-level bids are transfer, with 1♠ transfer to 1NT)

[rwbarton]

under ACBL GCC conventional meanings may be given to redoubles and responses

(including free bids) thereto

 

Assuming you are referring to "Competitive" section, item 2, you missed a word.

 

1♣ (1♦) 1♥=♠ is not GCC-legal (unless 1♣ was strong and forcing, not the case under discussion here, or 1♦ was conventional, unlikely).

[mycroft]

Yeah, double is a cheat, because *everybody* plays double as conventional, so you get to make "any [non-purely-destructive] agreements" over it.

 

Woe betide you if you find the one pair in the country that plays penalty doubles. Having said that, I might try that one day just for the director calls :-)

[mgoetze]

Ive tried searching but u cant search on 1D(too small) so didn't have any luck

You can also try my Systems Index for this sort of thing. I just added this thread.