[WesleyC]

A couple of years ago I came up with the idea of using Transfers to advances 2H/2S openings in an uncontested auction.
My preferred 2H opening shows both majors so i'll consider just the natural 2S opening for now.

After an opening 2S bid (which can be a 5c suit, especially when NV), the options I wanted responder to have were:

1) Stop in 3C/3D/3H.
2) Explore slam with C/D/H and big 2-suiters.
3) Invite in Spades.
4) Shortage ask confirming Spades.
5) Suit quality ask in Spades, for choice of game or slam investigation.

The basic structure I came up with was:

2NT = Clubs or Shortage Ask or General Invite.
3C = Diamonds.
3D = Hearts.
3H = Trump Length/Quality asking bid.
3S = Preemptive.

After 2S - 2NT/3C/3D opener always accepts the transfer which can then be passed.

2S 2NT
3C 3D is an artificial shortage ask.

2S 2NT
3C 3S is a general game invite.

2S 2NT
3C 3NT shows a mild slam try with long clubs.

Other continuations are natural(ish) and forcing.

The system works similarly after transferring to a red suit although I'm not sure about the best meaning for

2S 3C 3D 3S or 2S 3D 3H 3S.

After 2S 3H* (* suit quality asking bid) the response structure I came up with is:

3S = 5c suit. (then 3NT = to play)
3NT = Strong 5c suit (perhaps KQJxx or better)
4C-4S = best to worst 6c suits.

Does anyone already use this method (or something similar)?

Any comments or improvements would be much appreciated!

WesC

[Kungsgeten]

I like the idea, but I'm a bit concerned about letting the weak hand declare when we are strong. Perhaps something like this, where the transfers are more like puppets?

2S--2NT; 3C---
Pass = Long clubs
3D = Shortage ask
3H = GF with hearts
3S = INV
3N = Mild slam try with 2 spades

2S--3C; 3D---
Pass = Long diamonds
3H = INV with long hearts
3S = Slam try in spades with clubs as a possible source of tricks
3N = Mild slam try with long clubs

2S--3D; 3H---
Pass = Long hearts
3S = Slam try in spades with diamonds as a possible source of tricks
3N = Mild slam try with long diamonds
4C = At least 5-5 minors, slam try

[1eyedjack]

Kungsgeten, on 2014-September-02, 00:02, said:

I like the idea, but I'm a bit concerned about letting the weak hand declare when we are strong.

I think that you are so short of bidding space just to find the right strain and level after a weak 2 opener that it would be mistake to prioritise placing the declaration as part of the system design (possibly contingent on how disciplined is your definition of weak 2).
Possible exception is playing in 3N after opener shows a shortage. That you would almost always want to be played by responder.

[the hog]

Not a good idea, Wesly. Do you really want to put the strong hand down as a dummy?

[mattias]

I've briefly played step 1 as shortness ask, steps 2 to 4 as transfers and raise as preemptive. Over the transfer opener accepts with shortness or xx, with Ax/Kx/Qx they bid lowest new suit below 3 nt or 3 nt if no new suit is available. Higher new suits show shortness and support, and rebidding opener's suit shows a semisolid or solid suit. Things are slightly different after a transfer with step 4, the suit under opener's suit. I liked it but dropped it because of memory strain. Can give some more details if anyone's interested and when I'm not on my iPad.

[WesleyC]

Some amount of wrong-siding is an unavoidable side effect of the method. No arguments about that.

But when considering how much the wrong-siding actually costs, its important to remember just infrequent strong minor hands are. On the other hand, always having responder play NT is a major issue well worth considering.

Strong hands with hearts are a more common and Kungsgeten's ideas could certainly be valuable dealing with them. However, not having an anchor suit for the transfer does reduce responder's ability to compete in a competitive auction.

I've had significant success with auctions like:
2S (P) 3C* (3H)
3S*(4H) 5D

Where 5D was an excellent save, but generally missed by people who opened 2S.

WesC

[whereagles]

WesleyC, on 2014-September-01, 23:09, said:

A. A couple of years ago I came up with the idea of using Transfers to advances 2H/2S openings in an uncontested auction. (...) Does anyone already use this method (or something similar)?

B. After an opening 2S bid (which can be a 5c suit, especially when NV), the options I wanted responder to have were:
1) Stop in 3C/3D/3H.
2) Explore slam with C/D/H and big 2-suiters.
3) Invite in Spades.
4) Shortage ask confirming Spades.
5) Suit quality ask in Spades, for choice of game or slam investigation.

A. Yes, me. I devised a transfer response scheme after weak 2s. (By the way, it's "responses", not "advances". Advances refers to responses to overcalls.) My scheme applied after any weak 2, clubs included. It was more basic that yours though: responder would transfer with weak/strong 1-suiter or an invite with good side suit (almost never came out). It was ON in competition up to 2NT and OFF by passed hand.

B. Comment on your reasons to play transfers:
(1) You don't need to do this if you play classic style (6+ cards). Those hands just pass 2x. I did need it because we played systemic 5 cards weak twos.
(2) Good reason, but you need clear agreements on how to select a fit afterwards.
(3) Seems similar to my "invite with good side suit". It will be rare.
(4) This is when starts to get messy. If RHO overcalls, you'll be in a quandry.
(5) As above.

It's probably better to take out the shortage/suit quality asks from the scheme. You might lose the club transfer though... (or have to make it at the 4 level).

[kenrexford]

I like something similar, but the idea in short form is that a 3-bid is a relay showing either a weak hand and the suit one up or values with the suit actually bid. As a simple example, 3C shows either diamonds and weak or clubs with values.