showing a minor after transfer to major
#1
Posted 2012-December-27, 06:48
1nt-2d
2h
1nt-15-17
2d- hearts
what is your opinion about hiding a minor second suit as responder and bidding 3nt instead ? will you ever hide a 5 card suit, 5431,5422 ?
thanks in advance
Sharon
#2
Posted 2012-December-27, 07:28
Rik
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds the new discoveries, is not Eureka! (I found it!), but Thats funny Isaac Asimov
The only reason God did not put "Thou shalt mind thine own business" in the Ten Commandments was that He thought that it was too obvious to need stating. - Kenberg
#3
Posted 2012-December-27, 07:54
I prefer to play methods where I have two ways to show five of a major and then bid 3NT: one of them says that partner can pass with a 4333, and one says that he can't. Playing those methods, I'm more likely to suppress the second suit.
I don't regard showing a second suit as a slam try of any sort. With QJ10xx xx AJxxx x I bid 3♦ because I want to reach the right game opposite Kx AKxx KQx xxxx or Kx AKxx xxx KQxx.
#4
Posted 2012-December-27, 19:35
#5
Posted 2012-December-28, 10:52
Another interesting question is how to show your minor suit. I'd like to show it by bidding my other minor. That increases the odds the 1NT opener becomes declarer.
#6
Posted 2012-December-29, 15:58
With a 5431 I'll usually show my minor, because I can pattern out and partner can decide if we can make 3NT. Exceptions are obviously singleton A/K/Q.
With a 5-5 I'll always bid my minor, just to find the best spot.
#8
Posted 2012-December-31, 05:30
1NT 2D 2H 2NT = GF, 5H 4m (with continuations asking for a shortage in responder's hand, allowing you to find a 5-2 major fit if required, a 4-4 or 5-4 minor fit when 3NT isn't playable or 3NT when it is.
1NT 2D 2H 3D = GF, 5H 5D
#9
Posted 2013-January-03, 18:01
jophorst, on 2012-December-28, 10:52, said:
It's not terribly interesting as the answer is quite obvious: transfers.
-- Bertrand Russell
#10
Posted 2013-January-04, 04:04
I never played transfers so can't tell how good/bad they are, I will just show what pairs Goded-Lantaron and I think Fantoni-Nunes play, as far a I know it was developed by Belladona very long ago:
1NT-2♦ = 5♥ or 5♠-4/5m and a singleton
2♥ = forced
1NT-2♦
2♥-2♠ 5431 relay (can also be 5521) showing any 5M, and any 4+m
2NT = forced
after 2NT responder bids:
3♣ = 4+ clubs singleton diamond
3♦ = 4+ diamonds, singleton club
3♥ = 5♥, singleton spade
3♠ = 5♠, singleton heart.
#11
Posted 2013-January-04, 05:24
As for how to show the minor, over hearts this is easy. As long as you bundle your balanced invite into 2♠, you can organise the other hands via transfers. One popular option is for 2♠ to show any invite and to limit Opener's acceptance in such a way that the right contract is reached if Responder has a 5♥5m hand instead. Another is to include clubs in the 2♠ rebid along with the balanced invite and for 2NT to cover another awkward hand (such as a 5♥4♠ invite). What you use here will depend on what you had space for elsewhere in the structure.
After a 2♥ transfer this is harder. You are pretty much stuck with either natural or inversion. There are other solutions, as Fluffy points out, but they are more complex and usually involve making bigger changes to the NT structure than most players would be interested in.
#12
Posted 2013-January-04, 07:52
Zelandakh, on 2013-January-04, 05:24, said:
Well, yes, I guess most players are not interested in making any changes at all. Having 1NT-2♣-2red-2♠ be an invitational hand with 5 spades doesn't seem to me to be a very big change to most Stayman structures though (and as an added bonus you sometimes get to play 2♠ on a declined invite).
-- Bertrand Russell
#13
Posted 2013-January-04, 08:10
mgoetze, on 2013-January-04, 07:52, said:
It may not be a big change, but it has significant costs: it wrongsides spades, leaks information about opener's heart length, and means we sometimes get to the wrong contract when responder has a signoff with five spades and four hearts.
#14
Posted 2013-January-04, 11:30
Sign-offs are shown via reverse Stayman - opener bids the major he does not have. This gets you to 3♥ when you have a 5-4 fit, but opener would usually have broken a transfer anyway.
#15
Posted 2013-January-05, 00:47
Quote
Or play transfers as signoff-or-strong, and free up the 1NT-2D-2H-2NT/3H bids for new kinds of GF hands (like gnasher's distinguishing hands where opener has a choice on 4333 or not).
Admittedly works better when 2C is more Keri-like than when you are shoehorning hands into Stayman. But I could live with 1NT-2C-2D-2M as invitational with 5 like it was in the Goren days.
#16
Posted 2013-January-05, 16:45
PhilKing, on 2013-January-04, 11:30, said:
Wow I can't believe this trade-off is worth making. A sign-off in 2M is one of hte most frequent auctions over 1N IMO.
#18
Posted 2013-January-05, 18:09
(Edit - it wrongsides the major suit signoff, it loses the invite in hearts or some other bid after stayman since 1NT 2♣ 2♠ 3♥ is a signoff...)
It seems so unnecessary and pretty complicated to boot. Of all auctions, ones that start 1NT p transfer seem to be the least of my problems.
I have a little more experience against Keri and have seen it perform absolutely terribly. It gets you to so many bad 4-3 fits that I'm certain that one disadvantage overrides all advantages combined.
- billw55
#19
Posted 2013-January-05, 18:25
lalldonn, on 2013-January-05, 18:09, said:
Who doesn't get to three? Most people break with four hearts 80%+.
it makes garbage stayman (an enormous winner when it comes up) impossible,
Not quite, although it's a bit more of a gamble. We still bid 2♣ on a 4351 or a 3451 and punt a pass if partner open bids our 4-card major or bid 3♦. We gain outright when responder has a sign-off with 4M and 6m and hits a fit getting to an unbiddable game.
it gives them extra artificial bids to double by both players,
Not extra - just a different one. And if second seat wants to double after 1NT-p-2c-p-2h, then he is probably in a world of hurt.
it prevents opener from super-accepting for either major
When partner shows four of our major, the hand that knows what to do is in control - not vice versa. Outright gain, surely.
(btw I strongly disagree with the idea that opener usually superaccepts with four in the major - it's still a clear minority action), it prevents you from competing effectively if the next opponent interferes (1NT p 2♣ 2♠...),
OK - you personally are exempted from auto 3M auctions. So am I when the 54 fit is spades. Responder is in control.
If you play garbage Stayman, you can't compete that easily anyway.
and you lose whatever stayman followed by 2♠ was.
This is a gain compared with those who play Stayman followed by Two Spades invitational for the reasons Gnasher gave.
That is what I thought of in the first three minutes of thinking about that convention. That is not "almost no trade off". If I ever played it I'm sure I would see all the good things it does, and more bad things as well.
It seems so unnecessary and pretty complicated to boot.
It's really simple - promise!
Of all auctions, ones that start 1NT p transfer seem to be the least of my problems.
I have a little more experience against Keri and have seen it perform absolutely terribly. It gets you to so many bad 4-3 fits that I'm certain that one disadvantage overrides all advantages combined.
In England, most people who play Keri are pretty ordinary. Maybe it's not that bad.
.
#20
Posted 2013-January-05, 18:44
- billw55