1NT rebid after opponent's balancing double

1NT rebid after opponent's balancing double System on?

#1 tobycurtis

Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 2012-August-27
Gender:Male
Location:Hiroshima, Japan
Interests:Bridge & badminton

Posted 2015-May-05, 00:52

Hi all,

Here's the situation:

1x - (P) - P - (Double)
1NT - (P) - ?

In other words, partner has opened 1 of a suit. You are very weak and can't come up with a response. LHO doubles in the balancing seat. Then partner chimes in again with 1NT, promising 18-19 HCP and a balanced hand. Now it's back to you.

The question is, what's on, if anything? Does anyone play Jacoby transfers or Stayman in this situation? What's "standard"?

(May not be relevant, but in my specific hand, you have 5 spades to the 10, balanced hand with 1 HCP.)

Thanks!

Toby

#2 1eyedjack

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 6,575
Joined: 2004-March-12
Gender:Male
Location:UK

Posted 2015-May-05, 01:31

I would play all bids as natural and to play, and regard that as standard.

Psych (pron. saik): A gross and deliberate misstatement of honour strength and/or suit length. Expressly permitted under Law 73E but forbidden contrary to that law by Acol club tourneys.

Psyche (pron. sahy-kee): The human soul, spirit or mind (derived, personification thereof, beloved of Eros, Greek myth).
Masterminding (pron. m Posted Image

r-m

ing) tr. v. - Any bid made by bridge player with which partner disagrees.

"Gentlemen, when the barrage lifts." 9th battalion, King's own Yorkshire light infantry,
2000 years earlier: "morituri te salutant"

"I will be with you, whatever". Blair to Bush, precursor to invasion of Iraq

#3 P_Marlowe

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 10,250
Joined: 2005-March-18
Gender:Male

Posted 2015-May-05, 02:27

Natural is certainly standard, but to play xfer is certainly not wrong.

The only relevant difference, you need a way to play openers suit, i.e. I am not sure, you can
play xfers and stayman, but I dont think that stayman is that important in the given context.

Having said that, I would only make agreements abou this specific sitiuation, if I play in a fixed
partnership and a lot more, than I currently do.
If it fits in some generic meta rule stuff you already agreed to play, than go for it.

With kind regards
Marlowe

With kind regards
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)

#4 barmar

Group: Admin
Posts: 21,591
Joined: 2004-August-21
Gender:Male

Posted 2015-May-05, 08:30

I don't think there's much need for systems here.

The main purpose of transfers, IMHO, is to allow responder to show different ranges of values after partner opens 1NT: drop, invitation, game forcing, slam try. There's a secondary value in making the NT bidder declarer, but that's not the most important thing.

But when responder has passed, his lack of strength is known. And opener's rebid also shows his strength very narrowly. So responder can just set the contract.

#5 helene_t

The Abbess

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 17,198
Joined: 2004-April-22
Gender:Female
Location:Copenhagen, Denmark
Interests:History, languages

Posted 2015-May-05, 08:46

Obviously everything has to be natural.

First of all, there is no particular reason to think any conventions should apply here. So if undiscussed, everything is natural.

Second, the point of playing stayman and transfer is to make constructtive auctions, especially slam auctions, more accurate. But here we have already signed off.

Third, responder could easily have a hand suitable for a sign off in 2♣ or 2♦.

Fourth, it is ok to have the weak hand declare here. Doubler will be on lead which is an advantage.

The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket

#6 tobycurtis

Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 2012-August-27
Gender:Male
Location:Hiroshima, Japan
Interests:Bridge & badminton

BBO Discussion Forums: 1NT rebid after opponent's balancing double - BBO Discussion Forums