[RunemPard]

Hello,

Looking for links regarding transfer responses to a 1♣ opening. Have had trouble finding information regarding them so I would greatly appreciate any input.

I understand the concept of bidding 1♦/1♥ to show the next higher suit, but beyond that, I am not sure about other bids. For example, would 1♠ be a natural relay to 1N? After this, continuations are beyond me. I have been thinking that this could be useful to show weaker hands with diamonds or a limit raise in clubs allowing for 1♣-2♣ to always be 12+ playing inverted.

Other things would be showing a good ♦ suit or a decent hand with 5♦+4M.

I digress, links/input please! (I have searched google, but having a lot of issues...my search criteria is probably wrong.)

[ahydra]

In the context of a 1C = natural or 15-19 BAL, I play 1D = 4+H, 1H = 4+S, 1S = 4+D denying a 4cM unless in a good hand (~10+) and 1NT = club raise 6-9. You could probably play 1S = relay to 1NT as well, denying a 4cM or showing a good hand.

Continuation-wise, I play:
- after 1C-1D or 1C-1H opener always completes the transfer with 3 cards, otherwise bids 1NT with 15-19. This allows responder to takeout the short 1C with a very weak hand. If opener has 4+ card support he bids naturally. 2NT is a balanced hand with 4 card support
- after 1C-1S, 2D is natural (not a reverse).

If 1C-1S relay to 1NT, then you need to decide what to use opener's 2C and 2D as. Also the above responding structure probably isn't as good in a strong NT context.

ahydra

[RunemPard]

Thanks ahydra..

I managed to find a few links online. I was wording my search very wrong...lol. Still appreciate recommendations, because many of these links are completely different. We play a 15-17 NT.

One of them recommends playing a 55(52)...

1D=5+D or 4441, 4144, 1444.

[paulg]

Our system before we made some big changes is detailed at http://thebeercard.b...fer-walsh.html.

We now use 1NT as a game forcing relay, 2♣ as game forcing with five diamonds and the 1♠ response is 5-12 without a major. But the original worked fine

There is a lot on these forums and "transfer walsh" or "t-walsh" are good search terms.

[neilkaz]

It would be nice if someone came out with a good book on these methods.

[paulg]

 neilkaz, on 2012-September-13, 11:38, said:

It would be nice if someone came out with a good book on these methods.

There are few good topics for a bridge book. I guessing non-GCC methods would never make the list.

[mattias]

I'm not sure how good your swedish is, but there were a lot of ideas thrown around in http://www.svenskbri...topic.php?45537, especially https://www.dropbox....2qeg51/5542.doc is a nice and short introduction. Be a little careful with the transfers after 1♦ - 1M though, somehow they are easy to forget

[jallerton]

 paulg, on 2012-September-13, 04:52, said:

Our system before we made some big changes is detailed at http://thebeercard.b...fer-walsh.html.

We now use 1NT as a game forcing relay, 2♣ as game forcing with five diamonds and the 1♠ response is 5-12 without a major. But the original worked fine

So why did you change?

[Cthulhu D]

http://bridge.mgoetze.net/bbf.html

Has good resources.

[PhilKing]

However one plays it, the One Spade response to One Club is the Achilles Heel of Transfer Walsh. Hands that would have started 1♣-1♦1♥, for instance now have to bid rebid 1NT, 2♣ or 2♥ over 1♠.

An attractive solution, particularly if One Spade promises diamonds, is to play transfer reverses:

2♦ = hearts
2♥ = spades
2♠ = diamonds (direct 3♦ weak)

Over 2♦ and 2♥ responder just completes to two of the major with a minimum response with 3-card support, so with a 2425 17 count opposite a 3352 6-count, you can stop in a decent contract. The method allows you to reverse pretty light, taking the pressure off the 1NT and 2♣ rebids.

[Quantumcat]

 neilkaz, on 2012-September-13, 11:38, said:

It would be nice if someone came out with a good book on these methods.

My partner wrote an excellent article in Australian Bridge a few years ago. I'll see if I can locate it.

 PhilKing, on 2012-September-13, 18:45, said:

However one plays it, the One Spade response to One Club is the Achilles Heel of Transfer Walsh. Hands that would have started 1♣-1♦1♥, for instance now have to bid rebid 1NT, 2♣ or 2♥ over 1♠.

I don't see where the problem is. With a few partners I play 1♠ denies a major and is a 1NT response or weak with a minor. Opener can just make his normal reverse or bid 1NT with a balanced hand of the correct range.

[paulg]

 jallerton, on 2012-September-13, 15:48, said:

 paulg, on 2012-September-13, 04:52, said:

Our system before we made some big changes is detailed at http://thebeercard.b...fer-walsh.html.
We now use 1NT as a game forcing relay, 2♣ as game forcing with five diamonds and the 1♠ response is 5-12 without a major. But the original worked fine

So why did you change?

We invested quite a lot of time and effort moving to a relay system for 1M-2♣ auctions and extending this to 1m-1NT auctions was fairly easy. This meant that we needed the one spade response to cover all non-major hands rather than just the diamond suit.

[PhilKing]

 Quantumcat, on 2012-September-13, 22:31, said:

I don't see where the problem is. With a few partners I play 1♠ denies a major and is a 1NT response or weak with a minor. Opener can just make his normal reverse or bid 1NT with a balanced hand of the correct range.

The "normal reverse" gets you to the three level on hands where natural bidding sometimes goes 1♣-1♦-1♠-P (I know that's rare in Australia, but it can happen where 1M is not forcing).

After a reverse, Lebensohl often spews you out to 3♣ in a 5-2 fit when responder is weak.

When responder just completes to 2M there is another spin-off benefit - opener can infer that responder has 5 diammonds, so he can bid 3♦ forcing or just leb out to 3♦ as appropriate.

[phil_20686]

 PhilKing, on 2012-September-13, 18:45, said:

However one plays it, the One Spade response to One Club is the Achilles Heel of Transfer Walsh. Hands that would have started 1♣-1♦1♥, for instance now have to bid rebid 1NT, 2♣ or 2♥ over 1♠.

I have played these methods for ages, and I really don't understand what you are saying: you cannot rebid 1M when you are guaranteed to have no M fit, exposing your shape to the defence for zero gain. And its a big loss?

Also, Its better to play a whole round of transfers, some people play, eg, that 1S is the last transfer, and have to put minor hands into them. This is inefficient. Instead play:

1s=>1N, either a hand that would like to play 1N, or GF with 4M and longer diamonds. Can also be weak hands with long diamonds unsuitable for 1c-2d WJS.

1N=>2c transfer to clubs, showing 5+ clubs and 5+ HCP. Can have a 4cM if GF strength.

2c=>2d GF, transfer to diamonds, denies a 4cM.

Coming up with efficient continuations is fairly trivial now. The only real loss, is responder is (32)44, and weak, so that after 1c-1d-1M in standard systems, you can easily get back to clubs, when instead after 1c-1s-1N, you dont know about your club fit.

[MickyB]

PhilS - your 1C:1S doesn't look right to me. Just play it as ostensibly showing diamonds, opener rebids 1N with a balanced hand and 2C with an unbalanced hand. Worst case scenario is that responder is 3352 and you play the 5-2 club fit. I even have to rebid 2C with 4414 in my methods and it's fine. Now 1C:2C is free for something else.

PhilK - Not a bad idea with the xfer reverses, but I suspect for those putting 11-13/17-19 NTs through 1C it's better to play 1C:1S, 2D as the 17-19 NT. Obviously you and I don't have that problem.

[paulg]

 MickyB, on 2012-September-14, 06:31, said:

PhilK - Not a bad idea with the xfer reverses, but I suspect for those putting 11-13/17-19 NTs through 1C it's better to play 1C:1S, 2D as the 17-19 NT. Obviously you and I don't have that problem.

We do this. Major-suit reverses are less of a concern as opponents often bid if we have a fit, but the strong balanced is far more frequent and re-starting at 2♦ gives you the necessary room for sign-offs, finding the right game and slam invites.

[Adebisi]

Hi! I liked to play after 1D/H TRF: TRF accept 1H/S=11-13 bal( i play 14-16 notrump)after that 2C/D 2-way C/B, 1NT=17-19 bal, 2NT= 18+ 6+clubs.
1c-1s=5-11 w/o 4M if max 9-11 then unabalanced 54+minors or bad 6 diamonds,after that : 2diam =bal 17-19, and 2NT=16+ 5+C/4diam( rare bid, coz opps have lots of maj-s); 1c-1NT=9-11 bal, 1c-2NT=12-13 bal( inv againtst 11-13 bal);
1c-2c=FG nat/14+bal; 1C-2diam=FG 5+diam;
1C-2H/S=3-7 6+suit;
1C-2NT: 2-5 6+clubs or FG 55 clubs + another
1c-3C/D= 9-11 6+suit( if diam then good suit)
1C-1s-1NT wide range 11-16 coz responder with 9-11 bids always: 2h=9-11 5+C/4d, 2S=5+D/4c, 2NT= 9-11 bad 6+diam, thats basic stuff didnt add more followups.

[Adebisi]

just forgot: its important if u play trf walsh to open 1diam with 4diam/5C and 11-15.After 1d-1h/s-2c= 11-15 54+C/D both ways like in Polish Club systems, if u open 1C and get 1s response your bid is 2C , but 4-4 or 5-4 diamonds might get lost.

[PhilKing]

 phil_20686, on 2012-September-14, 06:06, said:

I have played these methods for ages, and I really don't understand what you are saying: you cannot rebid 1M when you are guaranteed to have no M fit, exposing your shape to the defence for zero gain. And its a big loss?

It's hardly zero gain just because partner cannot have the suit.

Play them a bit longer and you might get dealt: ♠AQxx ♥AQx ♦x ♣txxxx or ♠AQxx ♥AQx ♦x ♣Kxxxx. And when we have reversing values, we are continuing the bidding one level higher, which can only hurt the accuracy of our partscore, game and slam bidding.

By rebidding 1NT after a 1♠ response (or guessing to rebid 2♣) on the hands I gave above, we are often going to be in a worse spot, and are less well defined when partner has enough to explore further.

In "standard", when we rebid 2♣ or 1NT over 1♦ our hand is much more accurately defined.

[phil_20686]

 PhilKing, on 2012-September-14, 07:45, said:

It's hardly zero gain just because partner cannot have the suit.

Play them a bit longer and you might get dealt: ♠AQxx ♥AQx ♦x ♣txxxx or ♠AQxx ♥AQx ♦x ♣Kxxxx. And when we have reversing values, we are continuing the bidding one level higher, which can only hurt the accuracy of our partscore, game and slam bidding.

By rebidding 1NT after a 1♠ response (or guessing to rebid 2♣) on the hands I gave above, we are often going to be in a worse spot, and are less well defined when partner has enough to explore further.

In "standard", when we rebid 2♣ or 1NT over 1♦ our hand is much more accurately defined.

The first hand is a non issue, you just bid 2C. What shape do you think partner is? with 3361 he can pull to 2d (obviously NF), even if he did not want to WJS originally, else he can float 2c.

The second you also just bid 2C. If partner has 8-11 he will find another bid. either 3C or 2d or 2N. I would never reverse on this hand.

EDIT: besides, these hands are very rare. You have to be exactly (431)5, and have 15-17 HCP in order to have a losing case. You are winning easily on lots of other balanced hands just by rightsiding the 1N contract.