quick Rubensohl question

[pilun]

Sad that this group is dormant. Anyway

 

We play strong club with some transfer responses in competition. In particular

 

1♣ - (2♠) - 3♦ = 5+♥.

 

For people who do that after their notrump opening, 3♦ need not be good. Responder could be planning to pass opener's conversion to 3♥.

 

Do people think it should be different after a strong 1♣ opening? Or can the auction die in 3♥?

That might be nice occasionally.

 

On the other hand, opener might want to mark time with 3♥ on a variety of good hands. Seems quite likely.

 

So the question is this:

 

"Opposite opener's strong club, is a 3-level Rubensohl transfer forcing to game?"

[mw64ahw]

As a general rule I would have thought that transfers provide a mechanism whereby responder can force to game after a transfer has been completed so the transfer itself is not forcing to game.

[DavidKok]

We also play (a flavour of) Rubensohl in a number of situations where opener is unlimited. We play a simple scheme over the transfer where accepting it shows a minimum, and other bids show extras and establish a game force. The question is what each bid should mean. As a suggestion, we play:

 

3♦* (invitational or stronger transfer to hearts, shows 5+)-(P)-?

• 3♥ - any minimum, does not promise heart support.
  
• 3♠ - advance cue for hearts (since the opponents have shown spades). Had the opponents not shown spades this would be either an advance cue or real spades, to be clarified on the next round.
  
• 3NT - to play, denies a heart fit, shows extras.
  
• 4♣ - cue for hearts or long and strong clubs, to be clarified on the next round.
  
• 4♦ - same.
  
• 4♥ - Extras, fit, weaker than an advance cue followed by 4♥.
  
• 4♠ - splinter for hearts.
  
• 4NT - natural, quantitative (stronger than 3NT, denies a heart fit).
  

We use the same scheme if opener has opened 1NT, except that all the "natural with a long suit" options do not exist so the (advance) cues are not ambiguous, and obviously opener does not go past 4♥.

[awm]

I'd play these differently after a 1NT opening and after a strong club. The 1NT opening is more limited in terms of both strength and shape, so you don't lose as much by discarding the invitational range, nor is it particularly bad to drop opener in a five-card suit (since he will always have 2+ support). Over 1NT-(2♠):

 

3♦ = 5+♥ "to play" or GF. Opener always bids 3♥ unless holding a "super-accept" sort of hand (4+ support, non-min).

 

After 1♣-(2♠):

 

3♦ = either 6+♥ with 4+ points, or 5♥ and GF. Opener bids 3♥ unless he has enough extra to bid game opposite a heart semi-positive. Note that opener's 3♥ can easily be singleton (or even occasionally void).

 

In general we have found that it pays to be aggressive with these transfers when holding a six card suit, whereas holding only five it's often better to double or pass on questionable values.

[foobar]

I'd play these differently after a 1NT opening and after a strong club. The 1NT opening is more limited in terms of both strength and shape, so you don't lose as much by discarding the invitational range, nor is it particularly bad to drop opener in a five-card suit (since he will always have 2+ support). Over 1NT-(2♠):

 

3♦ = 5+♥ "to play" or GF. Opener always bids 3♥ unless holding a "super-accept" sort of hand (4+ support, non-min).

 

After 1♣-(2♠):

 

3♦ = either 6+♥ with 4+ points, or 5♥ and GF. Opener bids 3♥ unless he has enough extra to bid game opposite a heart semi-positive. Note that opener's 3♥ can easily be singleton (or even occasionally void).

 

In general we have found that it pays to be aggressive with these transfers when holding a six card suit, whereas holding only five it's often better to double or pass on questionable values.

This is an interesting treatment.

 

Do you have any agreements in sequences like 1♣ - (2♠) - 3♦ (♥; drop dead or GF) - (4♠)? In a Rubensohl sequence that showed invite+ strength, opener's pass would presumably be forcing.

[awm]

This is an interesting treatment.

 

Do you have any agreements in sequences like 1♣ - (2♠) - 3♦ (♥; drop dead or GF) - (4♠)? In a Rubensohl sequence that showed invite+ strength, opener's pass would presumably be forcing.

 

I can't imagine playing a 3♦ bid that could be "drop dead in hearts" opposite a strong club opener. Would prefer INV+ here (ideally the invite is 6+♥ so opener can accept on most minimums without landing in a 5-1 fit).

 

We play very few forcing passes and I'm sure that pass here would not be forcing even opposite an INV+ response. We similarly don't play forcing passes after 1♣ - (Pass) - Semi-positive - (Bid).

[Gilithin]

Quite surprised to see this discussion go on this long with no mention of Double followed by 3♥. Surely the 2 of these work together so to assign an optimal meaning to 3♦, you first have to have some idea as to what going through a double shows.