[timjand]

Just checking my understanding of the rules (EBU club in the UK).

Bidding: 1NT - p - 2D* - 2S - 2H

2D is announced as a transfer. E, who opened 1NT, says he did not see the 2S from N.

If the insufficient bid is not accepted by S, is it OK to replace 2H with 3H without any bidding restriction on W?

3H has a more precise meaning, since 2H is automatic and means nothing.

However it is useful to W who now knows E can tolerate hearts. W bids 4H which makes.

Most other tables bid successfully to 4H.

Tim

[Vampyr]

While the 3♥ bid is more precise in that it confirms a heart fit, the attempted 2♥ bid showed that the hand was not considered a super-accept. So I think it is close.

[VixTD]

Vampyr, on 2016-January-26, 06:44, said:

While the 3♥ bid is more precise in that it confirms a heart fit, the attempted 2♥ bid showed that the hand was not considered a super-accept. So I think it is close.

Not according to Timjand, who said that 2♥ is an automatic response to the transfer, so presumably they are not playing "super-accepts".

[timjand]

VixTD, on 2016-January-26, 07:45, said:

Not according to Timjand, who said that 2♥ is an automatic response to the transfer, so presumably they are not playing "super-accepts".

It would be helpful to consider both cases.

Tim

[RMB1]

timjand, on 2016-January-26, 08:02, said:

It would be helpful to consider both cases.

If the partnership agreement and partnership experience is that 2♥ is the only response to 2♦ then it appears that any legal call (including double) is allowed by Law 27B1(b) and does not silence partner.

If, by agreement or experience, opener may rebid above 2♥ with a fit for hearts, then the insufficient 2♥ excludes many of the hands the might correct to 3♥, so 3♥ is not a Law 27B1(b) correction; but Pass seems to have much the same meaning as 2♥ and would not silence partner.

In either case, is 2♥ artificial? I would rule that 2♥ is (incontrovertibly) not artificial. So 3♥ is allowed by Law 27B1(a) and does not silence partner.

[barmar]

VixTD, on 2016-January-26, 07:45, said:

Not according to Timjand, who said that 2♥ is an automatic response to the transfer, so presumably they are not playing "super-accepts".

I'll bet quite a bit that whoever declared the bid "automatic" didn't even think about that exception. While it's certainly possible that the pair doesn't play them, I don't think we can necessarily assume that from the formulation of the original question.

[timjand]

Thanks, this has been a helpful discussion.

Tim