Super Acceptance and Mike (& Anders') New Theory

[Double !]

I have never felt that there is a need to do anything other than accept the transfer even with 4 trumps with a minimum to average 1NT opener. If there is a game to be bid, P will bid again at which point you can choose what seems to be the most reasonable contract at this point in the auction. In fact, IMO, jumping just to show 4-card support shifts the burden back to responder who is now deprived of the ability to make a game try.

 

I use an alternative method whereby bidding a new suit as a pre-acceptance shows a max or near max and a decent 4-card side suit (that might prove to be a better trump suit at the slam level) along with 4-card trump support. I guess it's just a question of which type of hand and information that is needed to help responder occurs more often. It just happens to fit my comfort zone.

[coyot]

Well, let me tell you that these hands DO appear.

 

If you have 15 HCP and partner has 6-7 HCP, he will 95% of the time pass your transfer acceptance - and yet, the only thing you need to reach a good game is to meet your worthless doubleton with partners Axxx or xxxx. The game will be there, with odds good enough to be bid, and yet the partner will have absolutely no reason to try, since the 9card fit (that is 100% from your side of table) has much lower odds in his point of view, certainly not worth risking a distaster of 3NT with 23-24 HCP and no fit...

 

In other words... how many times it happened to you as the responder to think "oh my, if I only were sure that we have a fit, then I could invit, but what if he has a lousy doubleton? I'll be then lucky not to lose 3 tricks with KJ9xx :blink:.

 

The 9card upgrades the two-hand potential GROSSLY!

1) Losers in trump suit minimized

2) Extra entry to developed tricks

3) Ability to ruff even if opps lead trumps early

4) Chance for doubleton

5) Chance for ruff'n'sluff endplay

 

I don't have the tools/time to do any simulation, but I would be suprised if it turned out that jumping to three with minumum and 4card against a transfer is losing bridge in long term.

(Please, some sane bridge judgement included in the simulations. I will NOT do the jump with Qxx-AKQx-Qxx-Qxx, of course! Any 3-4-3-3 shape should be excluded unless it contains 3-4 Aces/Kings.)

[mike777]

Well, let me tell you that these hands DO appear.

 

If you have 15 HCP and partner has 6-7 HCP, he will 95% of the time pass your transfer acceptance - and yet, the only thing you need to reach a good game is to meet your worthless doubleton with partners Axxx or xxxx. The game will be there, with odds good enough to be bid, and yet the partner will have absolutely no reason to try, since the 9card fit (that is 100% from your side of table) has much lower odds in his point of view, certainly not worth risking a distaster of 3NT with 23-24 HCP and no fit...

 

In other words... how many times it happened to you as the responder to think "oh my, if I only were sure that we have a fit, then I could invit, but what if he has a lousy doubleton? I'll be then lucky not to lose 3 tricks with KJ9xx :blink:.

 

The 9card upgrades the two-hand potential GROSSLY!

1) Losers in trump suit minimized

2) Extra entry to developed tricks

3) Ability to ruff even if opps lead trumps early

4) Chance for doubleton

5) Chance for ruff'n'sluff endplay

 

I don't have the tools/time to do any simulation, but I would be suprised if it turned out that jumping to three with minumum and 4card against a transfer is losing bridge in long term.

(Please, some sane bridge judgement included in the simulations. I will NOT do the jump with Qxx-AKQx-Qxx-Qxx, of course! Any 3-4-3-3 shape should be excluded unless it contains 3-4 Aces/Kings.)

lower 1nt to 14-16 and perhaps the benefit from preemptive effect of 9 card fit at 3 level with minimum increases.

 

Add into the simulation mix some off shape 14 hcp 4 card super accepts and more preemptive value?

 

Please note the ability for opener to tell responder about minimum super accept and maximum superaccept.

[Chamaco]

Please note the ability for opener to tell responder about minimum super accept and maximum superaccept.

That is very important.

 

However, IMO, there should be a way to show a max WITHOUT disclosing the weak doubleton, and responder should be able to ask *if and only if* he interested.

 

So something like: 1st step above accept = max and a generic weak doubleton, 2nd step = max, no weak dblton, direct superaccept = min 4 card raise.

 

 

If one dislikes the 2NT superaccept with 3 trumps, then it is possible as well to use a scheme similar to Rosenkrantz's 3-way game try

(long suit= honor cluster similar to what Tysen suggested,

short suit = weak dbltn,

power try= max without features):

 

For example:

1NT:2D

.... 2H = normal

.... 2S = max with 4 trumps, generic dbltn, 2NT asks which dbltn

.... 2NT = honors cluster in spades (pard bids game with a decent hand and Hx in spades)

.... 3m = honors cluster in the minor bid(pard bids game with a decent hand and Hx in the suit)

.... 3H = minimum with 4 trumps

 

This leaves out the max hand without doubleton, that would make a "power game try": this hand, similarly to the Rosenkrantz scheme, will "fake" a cluster in the first step, so in this scheme, opener with a max hand a 4 trumps will bid 2NT, and responder, with 3C will ask which kind of game try this is.

 

 

The scheme for spades is the same, just shifted by one step.

[000002]

------------------------------------------

For example:

1NT:2D

.... 2H = normal

.... 2S = max with 4 trumps, generic dbltn, 2NT asks which dbltn

.... 2NT = honors cluster in spades (pard bids game with a decent hand and Hx in spades)

.... 3m = honors cluster in the minor bid(pard bids game with a decent hand and Hx in the suit)

.... 3H = minimum with 4 trumps

-------------------------------------------

 

 

HOW to bid when you hold :

 

♠ Axx

♥ Axxx

♦ Axx

♣ Axx

 

thanks

[helene_t]

HOW to bid in that way when you hold :

 

♠  Axx

♥  Axxx

♦  Axx

♣  Axx

 

thanks

Put one of the clubs between the spades, superaccept, and afterwards say "sorry, I missorted". Because you really promised four spades.

 

(Oh sorry the transfer was for hearts. Please ignore)

Edited August 5, 2005 by helene_t

[sceptic]

I think it's a bad idea to break the transfer with 3-card support.

 

what is 2NT promises max 3 card support, max hcp and 2 hi honours?

 

if you still don't like it, can you explain why please?

 

the structure I was shown is

 

break transfer

 

2NT promises max 3 card support, max HCP and two hi honours

 

3 of the major promises 4 trumps all side suits controlled

 

3 of a new suit promises max losers in suit bid

[Chamaco]

HOW to bid when you hold :

 

♠  Axx

♥  Axxx

♦  Axx

♣  Axx

 

thanks

*IF* you intend to show a power raise without a weak doubleton (I would not do it with this 4333 shape, if pard transferred with a yarborough, playing at 3 level won't be funny...), then you have to use Rosenkrantz "trick": you fake a "honor cluster" game try with the first step available after the "doubleton-showing step".

 

so:

 

1NT:2D

2NT(*):3C(**)

3H(***):responder passes or correct

 

2NT(*)= first step after 2S (which would show a short suit game try in an generic doubleton) = game try with spades cluster OR POWER GAME TRY without features

3C(**) = which game try ?

3H(***) = quantitative game try (3D would have shown a game try in spades)

[mike777]

Please note the ability for opener to tell responder about minimum super accept and maximum superaccept.

That is very important.

 

However, IMO, there should be a way to show a max WITHOUT disclosing the weak doubleton, and responder should be able to ask *if and only if* he interested.

Yes, it is easy to not show weak doubleton without getting this fancy.

 

1) PLAY USEFUL DOUBLETON NOT WEAK DOUBLETON OVER SUPERACCEPT 100%.

2) 2NT AS MAX NO USEFUL DOUBLETON

3) 3 OF THE MAJOR WITH MINIMUM

[beatrix45]

I did a quick simulation and found these actual results:

 

8 tricks = 16%

9 tricks = 34%

10 tricks = 36%

11 tricks = 12%

:P

Your computer simulation coincides with my 90 second mental simulation done at the table. I kept coming up with 50-50 chances for game, plus a few cold games and a few no play hands. So, at matchpoints, I took the mild swing of passing.

 

In terms of partner's hand, I lost the gamble. She had:

 

Ax

J10xx

K10x

AKQ9

 

Giving almost a 90% chance for ten tricks, BUT all the opponents' cards were offside, so nine tricks was the limit. Spade king and heart ace on declarer's right, with the diamond ace on the left and no 3-3 or J10 doubleton clubs.

[beatrix45]

It seems to me that "shape-showing" superacceptance (e.g. worthless doubleton) MIGHT, 1 time out of 30, help bidding a miracle slam.

:P

Wait a minute fellows! Why is everybody suddenly talking about a "worthless" doubleton. I was just thinking about a "working" doubleton like:

Ax

Kx

or even

AK

AQ

 

This comes from Mike and Anders concept of working points.

 

Your posting does raise what to me are crucial issues. Giving the opponents extra info when responder is broke, and playing from the wrong side when a retransfer is not possible.