Systems after 2NT-3R

[ahydra]

Hi BBF,

 

My partner and I are currently having an epic discussion about methods over 2NT-3R transfer, and I'd like to request your input - basically, "what do you play":

 

- does 2NT-3R; 3M (complete transfer) promise a fit?

- superaccepts - do they promise 4 cards, and are they cues or trick sources, etc?

- is 2NT-3R; 3M-4x a cuebid or natural second suit (5-5)?

- any opinions on why one scheme may be better than another?

- do you vary your system for pairs vs teams and according to NT range?

 

Assume a two-point 2NT range starting at 20 (20-21, 22-23, etc) and Puppet or 5-card Stayman.

 

Thanks,

 

ahydra

[fromageGB]

I superaccept with 4. Sometimes comes a cropper and goes off, sometimes finds the 23 point game.

 

Not finding a suitable method where a natural 4m can be used both as a slam try and as a precursor to ace asking (tell me if you play one), I am currently playing 4♣ as a slam try transfer to diamonds (accepting gives the ace response, denial bids 4♦ whereafter 4♥ can still be ace asking), and 4♦ is a direct ace ask in clubs.

 

I don't see that a cue bid is much use; you expect partner to be able to cue anything.

[nige1]

FWIW, IMO, After, say, 2N - 3♦ (transfer) - ??

• 3♥ = NAT Normal action with 2-3♥s
• 3♠ = NAT 5 ♠s & 2 ♥s.
• 3N = ART 4+ ♥s . Responder normally retransfers with 4♦ other bids are RKCB or shortage.
• 4♣ = ART 4+ ♥s less enthusiastic.

 

After say 2N - 3♦ - 3♥ - ??

• 3♠ = PUP to 3N. Opener, with 3♥s can bid 4♣ if max or 4♥s otherwise.
• 3N = ART 4 ♠s & 5 ♥s. Opener can pass or correct to 4♥ or 4♠. 4♣/4♦ show enthusiasm for ♥/♠.
• 4m = NAT F1 or you can invert their meanings.

[Cyberyeti]

We take an unusual approach to this and have bid a number of good slams as a result. 3N/4♥ are the way round they are as mins more common than maxes as we divide them

 

2N-3♦

3♥ = nothing special

3N = min 4 card ♥ support

4♥ = max 4 card ♥ support

New suit = at least Hxx ♥, HHxxx in suit bid H=AKQ

 

Over 2N-3♥ is very similar

[wank]

superaccepts are counter productive.

 

just play completion as fit showing. then next step = balanced slam try and anything else = shortage slam try. responder's shape is much more important than whatever opener could hope to convey.

 

2nt-3d-3s = 5s+1-2h. perhaps you don't need this, depending which version of 5 card stayman you play, but i would never play any version of 5 card stayman over 2n, so i do need it.

[jallerton]

superaccepts are counter productive.

 

just play completion as fit showing. then next step = balanced slam try and anything else = shortage slam try. responder's shape is much more important than whatever opener could hope to convey.

 

2nt-3d-3s = 5s+1-2h. perhaps you don't need this, depending which version of 5 card stayman you play, but i would never play any version of 5 card stayman over 2n, so i do need it.

 

This is nice method, but only really works if played in conjunction with 4-card Stayman (and Smolen). If played with 5-card Stayman, then there's no way to investigate both a 4-4 spade fit and a 5-3 hearts fit when Responder is 4-5 in the majors. Some pairs solve this problem by having Opener break to 3♠ with 4-2 in the majors, but this method suffers from information leakage and also seems to make it difficult to unscramble all of the hand types.

[Mbodell]

I play that you don't have to super accept with 4. Also, I put other in the 2nd poll because I think it is different if 4x is 4m than if it is 4♥ after a transfer to ♠.

[jodepp]

I only like to super-accept (SA) when I think the transfer bid has improved my hand. I even SA on some three-card holdings that has 5-3-3-2 shape. Like a previous respondent, sometimes this works and sometimes it doesn't. But I've experienced enough good results to 'continue the experiment'.

 

Having four-card support IMO doesn't mandate a SA by opener, although some players do; that's fine, just not my cup of tea.

 

After a transfer, a new suit by responder is something I've always played as natural and slammish. I can understand why someone might want to play that as a cuebid but I think it's more productive to show a trick source.

[GrahamJson]

Completing the transfer is the normal action and neither confirms or denies a fit. Other options, I suggest, should be that 3NT should show a maximum with good four card support whilst a new suit (I.e. 2NT - 3H - 4C) shows good 3 card support, a good five card suit and a maximum, Ax KQX Axx AKJ10x.

[nige1]

A drawback to breaking with 3-card support is that it risks losing a 4-4 fit that might play for more tricks e.g.

North: ♠ Q J x x x ♥ x x ♦ K Q J x ♣ x x

South; ♠ A K x ♥ A J ♦ A x x x ♣ A x x x

[Cyberyeti]

A drawback to breaking with 3-card support is that it risks losing a 4-4 fit that might play for more tricks e.g.

North: ♠ Q J x x x ♥ x x ♦ K Q J x ♣ x x

South; ♠ A K x ♥ A J ♦ A x x x ♣ A x x x

 

Yup, we only do it with a 5 card side suit so there won't be a 4-4 fit missed.

[apollo1201]

Far from being expert, I like to play that acceptance promises the fit, usually 3 but could be 4 in 4333. As a corollary, very weak responder with a 5cM passes. Remebering playing 3S in 5-2 fit with 20 hcp facing xxxxx Qx xxx xxx, I got easily convinced it was not a bad trade off. Then 3M+1 by responder cant be to play,it asks opener to cue his controls economically, while 4m is slammish with side suit (4 or 5 cds), not denying controls skipped. Sequences are then easier and more reliable to reach slam, from what I experienced.

Superaccept is 4M when all other suits are controlled, or cheaper cue otherwise.

For minors we play transfer, cheaper NT = not interested (doubleton), others = answers in steps like to RKCB.

Again, this is probably less than for an expert but for average+ it works, is simple to use and is quite easy to remember.

[WesleyC]

Far from being expert, I like to play that acceptance promises the fit, usually 3 but could be 4 in 4333. As a corollary, very weak responder with a 5cM passes. Remebering playing 3S in 5-2 fit with 20 hcp facing xxxxx Qx xxx xxx, I got easily convinced it was not a bad trade off.

 

My experience has more cases where we end up sneaking home 3S in a 5/3 fit vs going down in an entry-less 2NT. Or even worse, making a lucky 4S in a 5/4 fit with 2NT still in trouble. Passing 2NT on weak hands with a 5c major just doesn't feel right to me.

[Zelandakh]

After 2NT - 3♦; 3♥, there is space to do some clever things. One option is to use transfers here:

 

3♠ = balanced cog or clubs or 1-suited and slammy

3NT = 4 spades, cog

4♣ = diamonds

4♦ = 5-5 majors

 

Obviously this assumes you can handle 5♥4♠ slammy hands through Puppet, which should be easy enough but not everyone does. Some alternative artificial uses for 3♠ here are to differentiate between 4 and 5 card side minor suits or to initiate cue bidding. Once you deal with the 5♥4♠ hands through 3♣ and 3♦ - 3♥ - 3NT, the options increase greatly.

 

After a spade transfer and acceptance there is not the space for such tricks but a 4♥ rebid is available for something else when the major 2-suiter is covered elsewhere - a decent option is to use this as a one-suited slam try.

 

The best method of transfer breaks I can remember seeing was developed by a group of American players - they gave it some named based on flags and something else but I can't remember. It was published in the English Bridge magazine a few years ago though so check your back copies. The basic idea was that the super-accepts should show specific points, critically not only trump length and a side feature but also a specific number of controls. I think there was actually too much there for a normal club player in what is a rare auction but would recommend it for a serious pair looking to reach a high level.

 

There have also been a few other threads touching on this area in the last few years so a short search might also turn up some useful points. I seem to recall Frances making an interesting post in this area a couple of years ago - perhaps you can find that...

[lmilne]

Hi BBF,

 

My partner and I are currently having an epic discussion about methods over 2NT-3R transfer, and I'd like to request your input - basically, "what do you play":

 

- does 2NT-3R; 3M (complete transfer) promise a fit?

I play 3M shows 2, 3M+1 shows 3+, others super-accepts.

 

- superaccepts - do they promise 4 cards, and are they cues or trick sources, etc?

 

I just bid 3M+2 with all 4+ support super-accepts, although I think the trick sources idea is a good one. Cues are a waste of time, IMO, even though they are standard.

 

- is 2NT-3R; 3M-4x a cuebid or natural second suit (5-5)?

 

Natural second suit. This is fairly standard and necessary unless you play 3M guarantees a fit.

 

Over our 3M+1 bid showing a fit, we have 4 steps (e.g. 2NT-3D-3S, we have 3NT/4C/4D/4H available) below game. We use 4D as a re-transfer and all the other bids show shortages in whatever way you can remember. Balanced slam try re-transfers and invites with 5M or cue-bids or keycards.

 

- any opinions on why one scheme may be better than another?

 

Easy to remember and isolates the main factor for deciding on a tight slam with a major suit fit (shortages in the transferrer's hand), while leaving maximum amount of room for natural bidding after opener shows no fit. Allows slam decisions by responder immediately rather than wondering whether opener's accept contains a fit for M or not.

 

- do you vary your system for pairs vs teams and according to NT range?

I play 3 different notrump ranges and the 2NT opening changes accordingly. I don't play a different system over each one and I think doing so is inviting disaster. Being a 19-21 or a 20-21+ doesn't really affect the auction much although obviously responder must be a little stronger for slam investigations.

[ArtK78]

I play 3M shows 2, 3M+1 shows 3+, others super-accepts.

 

So, what you are saying is that a transfer in response to a 2NT opening is game forcing if partner has 3 card trump support.

 

I doubt that there are many hands that will make game when partner has 3 card trump support and responder was planning on passing opener's completion of the transfer.

 

 

 

[gszes]

After trying a whole kit and caboodle of systems I have "settled" into the following scheme:

 

after 3d (transfer)

 

3h 2/3/4 card support does not expect to make game opposite Qxxxx and out (Axxx QJx KQJ AKJ)

3s 5 spades 2 hearts (sometimes 1:)) hoping to escape for another day^

3n no long suit asks splinter if responder interested in slam (Kxx Axxx AKQJ Ax)

4c super accept 5 clubs

4d super accept 5 diamonds

4h super accept no decent splinter suits and no long suits (Kxxx AQJx KQxx KQ)

 

After 3h (transfer)

 

3s 2/3/4 card support does not expect to make game opposite Qxxxx and out. (see above)

3N (same as above)

4c same as above

4d same as above

4h super accept 5 hearts at least HH

4s same as above

 

The presence of a 5 card suit in opener's hand can make a huge difference for slam and is much more likely than the presence of another 5+ card suit in responder's hand. Easy to remember and most continuations are easy also.

 

* This can just as easily be played as 5 spades and super accept but have found more utility using it as a secondary option.

 

PART B of the question 3d (transfer) 3h 3x (except for 3n) seems better to play as a splinter since the incidence of 2 5 card+ suits in the same hand is pretty small.

[Fluffy]

I have always played GF transfers, so partner accepts the transfer with support and bids 3NT/3♠ without. Sometimes you miss stopping in 3M, but not often.

 

After 2NT-3x-3NT (no support) new suits are natural, this creates a problem when you have a strong hand with 6 card major. But you can always fake your 3 card fragment as 5 card side suit and later on rectify to 5M/6M/7M. Texas also solves this issue when hand is good enough.

 

After 2NT-3x-completion, I use 3NT as balanced slam try and others as short. Wank seems to play 3♠ as balanced and 3NT as spade short, no big difference but 3NT as balanced looks more intuitive to me.

[wank]

fluffy after 2nt-3M-3nt i play 4M as forcing with the major and suit below and 4M-1 as a retransfer. that makes opener play it when you're long and weak and keeps the bidding open when you're strong. i play 2 under slam tries rather than texas though.

[Fluffy]

What about 5♥-5♦ and 5♠-5♥?

[PhilKing]

I also like to play the transfer as FG and completion to show a 3-card fit.

 

However, I strongly disagree that being locked into the major is a good idea. We still need a way of getting to 3NT and playing slam in another suit.

[Kungsgeten]

To you who play that accepting the transfer shows 3(+): what range is your 2NT opening?

 

I used to play this over a 22-24 2NT opening and liked it a lot, and its very uncommon to stop in 3M vs that strength. Then we included 20-21 balanced in 2C and played 2C-2M as to play vs 20-21 NT (but transfers may be better) so that we could use the same structure over 2C-2D; 2NT.

 

If playing 2NT as 20-21, do you still play that accepting the transfer shows support?

[lmilne]

So, what you are saying is that a transfer in response to a 2NT opening is game forcing if partner has 3 card trump support.

 

I doubt that there are many hands that will make game when partner has 3 card trump support and responder was planning on passing opener's completion of the transfer.

 

You're right. My system is not designed to avoid bidding games after one hand has shown 20+ points, it is designed to make slam bidding more accurately.

 

Every system has its trade-offs. This is a truism, but making a system effective involves examining the frequency of trade-offs. The partnership I currently play in has judged that avoiding playing 4M-1 against 3M= when we have a 5-3 fit is not a priority, whereas showing identifying major suit fits immediately so that we can show responder's shortage IS a priority. You may think differently.

[Finch]

I play transfers as game forcing opposite any uncontested 2NT bid (not in auctions such as 2S-2NT or 1H P P 2NT where you are very unlikely to be making a slam).

I switched a couple of years ago after running a number of simulations, which showed that

 

- with a really bad hand with a long major, you are as likely to be making 2NT as you are 3 of the major (partner is allowed a long minor of their own). And on some of them, when you pass 2NT, at other tables opener broke the transfer and they went off in game.

 

- it's hugely beneficial for slam bidding, assuming you play some good methods (of your choice) after the transfer is completed

 

- if you have a 4522 0-count you can transfer to hearts and hope that either partner completes or bids 3S showing 4+ spades. If partner bids 3NT you will just go a couple more off.

[lowerline]

After 2nt-3♥

 

3♠ = doubleton ♠ --> 4x natural

3nt = 3crd ♠ --> 4m control-showing; 4♥ re-transfer

4x = 4crd ♠ max, control-showing

4♠ = 4crd ♠ min