Slam Tries after Transfers

[Cascade]

I am interested in what are considered standard developments on these auctions:

 

1NT 2♦/♥

2♥/♠ 3♣/♦

3♥/♠ ?

 

How do you investigate slam?

 

Does a cue-bid tend to show a high-card feature or could it be shortage?

 

Or do you bid your fragment?

 

Has anyone experimented with showing shortage as responder immediately after the transfer:

 

1NT 2♥

2♠ 3♣ = stiff club

 

TIA

[mike777]

I assume most of the below stuff is standard:

 

1nt=2h=

2s=deny 4 spades

.... 2nt=invite with 5 spades

.... 3c=force with clubs

...... .. 3s=set spades as trumps

...... .. new suit=cue for clubs

... 3d=force with D

...... ... 3s=set spades as trumps

...... ... new suit=cue for D

.... 3h= force 5-5 with 5-4 go thru stayman

.... 3s=invite with 6

.... 3nt play with 5h

.... 4c.4d.4h=splinter

.... 4s=mild slam try with 6, use texas tfr to sign off in s

.... 4nt quant with 5(to ace ask, bid 1nt=4h=4s=4nt)

2nt, 4 spades non minimum, no useful doubleton often 4333

.... 3h retransfer to spades

3c,3d,3h=4 spades, useful doubleton

.... 3h=retransfer

.... 3s=sign off

3s=4 spades, minimum no useful doubleton

[Fluffy]

after that sequence we jsut show any kind of cuebid (AK,sing or void).

 

to show shortness we use this:

 

1NT-2♦

2♥-2♠ = ANY 5M-4m- 3-1 or 1-3.

[Cascade]

I assume most of the below stuff is standard:

 

1nt=2h=

2s=deny 4 spades

.... 3c=force with clubs

...... .. 3s=set spades as trumps

... 3d=force with D

...... ... 3s=set spades as trumps

Thanks Mike but I am asking more specifically about continuations after the above. Particularly the style of cue-bids used.

[mike777]

If I understand, your question is what do we cuebid?

 

I am a strong believer in the captain principle.

On this type of auction, responder is captain.

I basically want the NT hand to describe itself to me. As responder I can make any cuebid since I am in control not partner. My goal is to make bids to make NT hand give me information I need not give information to the NT hand.

 

My bias here but I think it is very wrong to let the balanced limited hand make the decisions here unless I sign off or make a limited response.

So:

 

1nt=2h

2s=3c

3d=cuebid in support of clubs, often an ace. Now I just want p to keep cuebidding useful values unless I sign off.

 

Of course as Jimmy, Lukewarm can tell you his relay system tells more but I can never remember it.

[Guest Jlall]

i use bid=fragment. 3N= 5422, rebid of minor= 5-5+ 4M=6-4. Shape is most important.

[Cascade]

Thanks Justin

 

Some questions:

 

Is 3NT a mild slam try otherwise you would just bid 3NT without showing your minor?

 

Would 4NT show a better hand than 3NT or is it RKCB?

 

After you bid a fragment (or other shape bid) is opener expected to automatically cue-bid or is he supposed to exercise judgement with wasted values in your short suit(s)?

 

TIA

[Rebound]

<snip>

After you bid a fragment (or other shape bid) is opener expected to automatically cue-bid or is he supposed to exercise judgement with wasted values in your short suit(s)?

<snip>

No offense, but to me it would seem pointless to bid a new suit unless you expect partner to make some use of the information. OTOH to me, how you expect partner to respond to that info would be a matter of style. If you tend to make thin slam tries I would go with the latter, but if they are very sound you should probably have partner cooperate when possible. Of course, I'm no expert, and there is surely a chance those among you will disagree. Just my 2 cents really.

[luke warm]

these are all style, or philosophical, differences... wayne and justin appear to want responder to describe his hand (either cue or distribution)... mike (and i'm in this camp) wants the limit hand to describe

 

from my point of view, it makes more sense for responder to ask, so he can place the contract while letting opps know least possible about the 2 hands... heck, they already know a lot about opener's

[Free]

these are all style, or philosophical, differences... wayne and justin appear to want responder to describe his hand (either cue or distribution)... mike (and i'm in this camp) wants the limit hand to describe

 

from my point of view, it makes more sense for responder to ask, so he can place the contract while letting opps know least possible about the 2 hands... heck, they already know a lot about opener's

In relay auctions, it's usually better to let the balanced hand ask, and the unbalanced show. This way, the balanced hand knows immediatly if there are lost values in certain suits. So imo, it's better to have both ways available: a full relay to ask opener's distribution AND a reversed kind of relay to let responder show his hand. Some hands it's just better to show, and others it's better to ask. Having both ways available, it's up to you which way you want to go ;)

[pclayton]

Wayne: This is a system called Goldman that Chris Larsen showed me:

 

1N - 2♣

2♦ - 3♦ = 5-5 in the majors - pick your level and strain

 

1N - 2♣

2 major - 3 of other major - unknown singleton and a slam try. Opener is expected to relay with 3♠ or 3N to find out the shortness

 

1N - 2♣

2 major - 4 clubs - RKC Gerber

 

1N - 2♣

2♦ - 4♦ - Balanced slam try

 

1N - (Jacoby Transfer)

(acceptance) - 3 of other major, 4♣ and 4♦ all show the same as after Stayman and a major suit response.

 

1N - 2♠ (transfers to ♣)

3♣ - 3 major = clubs / and 4 of the OTHER major and a slam try.

 

Same with 1N - 2N (♦'s).

[luke warm]

In relay auctions, it's usually better to let the balanced hand ask, and the unbalanced show. This way, the balanced hand knows immediatly if there are lost values in certain suits.

i sorta agree, but not with game force hands... i like for responder to ask with those... with invitational hands, yeah the other way is ok