[Kungsgeten]

When we open, and they overcall, responder uses transfers in the following situations:

- 1m-(Dbl/1D/1H). Transfers starting with (re)double.
- 1M-(Dbl). Transfers starting with 1NT.
- 1H-(1S). Transfers starting with 1NT (double is balanced or both minors).
- 1X-(2X). Transfers starting with the lowest suit they've shown, or 2NT if the suit isn't available at the 2-level.
- 1X-(2D/H/S). Transfer starting with 2NT.

We currently do not use transfers after 1m-(1S), and not after 1X-(2C). We play constructive non-forcing freebids (about 8-11 hcp) in these auctions.

Have any of you tried playing transfers after 1M-(2C)? Misho have a treatment here: http://www.bridgewit...titive_bids.doc which works like this:

1S-(2C)--
Dbl = Diamonds or balanced.
2D = 4+ hearts, F1
2H = Non forcing freebid.
2S+ = Not really transfer related.

1H-(2C)--
Dbl = Diamonds or balanced misfit.
2D = 4+ spades, F1
2H = Raise.
2S = Non forcing freebid.
2NT+ = Not really transfer related.

Using Dbl as diamonds and 2D as the other major might be fine, but one thing I enjoy about two-level transfers is to have two ways to raise the major. Do you think it could be sensible to give up having a diamond bid at the two-level? Something like this:

1S-(2C)--
Dbl = Normal negative double.
2D = 5+ hearts, about 8+ hcp.
2H = Constructive+ spade raise.
2S = Bad spade raise.
2NT = Some sort of raise?
3C = Diamonds, INV+.
3DH = Fit jump.
3S = Preemptive.

Just to compare how we play now:

1S-(2C)--
Dbl = Negative double. Game forcing if followed by a new suit.
2DH = Negative free-bid, about 8-11.
2S = Normal raise.
2NT = 4+ limit+ raise.
3C = 3-card limit raise.
3DH = Natural, game forcing one-suiter.
3S = Preemptive.

We lose the ability to bid 2D. This means that we'd probably need to double with some constructive hands with five diamonds, that doesn't want to pass. I have never played forcing free bids (believe it or not), but I guess that's the case if you're playing 2D as a natural force too? With 6 diamonds, and say 10+ hcp, we could bid 3C. With 5 diamonds and GF values I guess we'd double (as we usually do now).

We gain a way to show hearts when we hold GF values, but not suitable for jumping to 3H (can be an awkward hand when we have to start with a double). We also gain three-level fit jumps. Perhaps most importantly though, we have two ways to raise spades at the two-level.

I think there's less benefits after a heart opening, but I guess we'd play something like this:

1H-(2C)--
Dbl = Negative double.
2D = Heart raise.
2H = Heart raise.
2S = Negative free bid.
2NT = Heart raise.
3C = Diamonds.
3D = Fit jump.
3H = Preemptive.
3S = Nat GF.

What do you think?

[Shugart23]

when bidding goes 1H-(2C)- ? we use a version of transfer lebensohl.

Double is negative
2D - is to Play
2H is to play....
2S is to play
2NT is transfer to Clubs and will pass after the transfer or invite into a game or bid 3NT which shows a Club Stop
3C - transfer to Diamonds (weak or strong)
3D - transfer to Hearts (weak or strong)
3H is transfer to Spades ( weak or strong)
3S is transfer to 3NT without a stop....this gets the lead around to Opener if Opener accepts the transfer
4C is control asking
game bids are to play


I would note, that this is what we used when playing 5 card Majors however, we still use this same structure even though now we are playing MICS (canape). I can also Pass and just wait to see if Opener bids her better suit on her second bid.

[awm]

Your original negative free bid methods seem really bad to me, so perhaps I'm not the best one to comment here.

But in any case, I'd think you need a few more calls to deal with non-fit hands here, both good semi-balanced hands and hands with diamonds. Maybe over 1♠-2♣ something like:

X = 3-4♥, no 3♠
2♦ = 5+♥
2♥/2♠ = raises
2NT = inv+ with diamonds + stopper
3♣ = GF with diamonds
3♦ = constructive natural
3♥/3♠ = raises

[Kungsgeten]

awm, on 2018-July-01, 06:31, said:

Your original negative free bid methods seem really bad to me

Could you please expand why you think the NFB methods seems really bad? I think we could use the 2NT and cue-bid better, but otherwise I they're okay.

[awm]

Kungsgeten, on 2018-July-01, 08:54, said:

Could you please expand why you think the NFB methods seems really bad? I think we could use the 2NT and cue-bid better, but otherwise I they're okay.

In general, I think the advantage of non-forcing bids is that you can pass them. If you never (or almost never) pass then you're better off playing bids as forcing. I think this is a problem with negative free bids in general -- opener can't pass with a singleton because responder often has only five (and you would play a 5-1 fit with half the points, not a great result). Opener can't pass with a real fit because 10-11 with a six-card suit opposite three-card support doesn't need more than 22-23 sometimes for game. Opener can't pass with a 14-15 count and doubleton because you'd miss game opposite 10-11 (not to mention you might have a 6-2 fit). Putting this all together it seems like opener can only pass when holding 11-13 with exactly doubleton, and some of those might not even want to pass (i.e. it might be better to rebid a six-card spade suit).

At the same time you've narrowed the range and discarded weak jumps, so you still have no bid with 5-7 hcp and a six-card suit (these hands are often cited as a win for "normal" NFB). And by using 2NT as a raise, you leave yourself with no easy call with a balanced invite (I guess you double, but now you're doubling with hands holding neither 4♥ nor GF values which won't always make the auction simple).

It seems easily better to rearrange as follows:

2♦ = 5+♥ any strength (if very weak, 6+♥)
2♥ = INV+ values at most 2♠, less than 4♥, balanced or diamonds
3♦ = constructive, less than INV, 6+♦

This gives you better auctions with 5♥ and GF (2♦ then bid on), gives you a call with a balanced invite (2♥), gives you a call with 5-7 and 6-red suit (2♦/3♦), purifies the double so it's always 4♥, and frees up 3♥ to use as a raise. The only real loss is that you can't stop in precisely 2♦ any more, but as outlined above it's not clear how often that would work out for you (especially assuming you don't consider missed games or 5-1 diamond partials as good results).

[nullve]

Kungsgeten, on 2018-June-30, 15:49, said:

one thing I enjoy about two-level transfers is to have two ways to raise the major.

That would be my reason for playing transfers here, too.

Based on what I play already:

1♥-(2♣)-?:

(...)
X = takeout, usually with 2- C unless GF
2♦ = "bad 3(4)c raise or GF-except-rebid with 5+ D" [was "GF-except-rebid with 5+ H"]
2♥ = "constructive 3(4)c raise" [was "bad-or-constructive 3(4)c raise"]
2♠ = "GF-except-rebid with 5+ S"
2N = INV+ Stenberg, always with 4+ H
3♣ = INV+, 3(4) c raise
3♦ = bad PRE raise
3♥ = good PRE (i.e. "mixed") raise
(..)

1♠-(2♣)-?:

(...)
X = takeout, usually with 2- C unless GF
2♦ = "6+ H or GF-except-rebid with 5+ H" [was "GF-except-rebid with 5+ D"]
2♥ = "bad 3(4)c raise or GF-except-rebid with 5+ D" [was "GF-except-rebid with 5+ H"]
2♠ = "constructive 3(4)c S raise" [was "bad-or-constructive 3(4)c raise"]
2N = INV+ Stenberg, always with 4+ S
3♣ = INV+ 3(4)c raise
(...)
3♥ = bad PRE raise
3♠ = good PRE (i.e. "mixed") raise
(...)

The red suit "switch" over 1♠-(2♣) and the 2M-1 response showing a "M raise or diamonds" are similar to what awm suggested and also to what I play over 1M-(P).

The reason I want the 2M-1 to contain the "bad" 3(4)c M raise is that I want to save space when Responder has the GF hand with diamonds. (Space is saved because Opener will just complete the transfer more often.)

[nullve]

awm, on 2018-July-01, 10:03, said:

And by using 2NT as a raise, you leave yourself with no easy call with a balanced invite (I guess you double, but now you're doubling with hands holding neither 4♥ nor GF values which won't always make the auction simple).

A truly balanced invite without support must contain 3+ C and can be passed IMO, although it's possible to miss game when Opener's shape suggests he should pass, too.

[yunling]

Majors are more important than ♦ so I agree with awm's method, no need to show ♦ at 2 level.
People play transfers over natural 1♣ for the same reason.

However if the overcall is 2♦ then NFB makes sense.

[dokoko]

I like to play transfers over opp's overcalls as this enables us to bid more often when we see reason to do so. Interesting material can be found on Glen Ashton's site.

IMO an unbid minor is more important than a second 3cd raise on 2-level but that might be a matter of taste.