[jogs]

lamford, on 2016-November-07, 05:35, said:

---

IMPs. Your go.

You are playing transfer responses to 1C, and 1S on the first round would have shown clubs. And what do people think of playing 4C/4D by North on the first round as slam-tries in hearts/spades respectively?

Maybe in a contested auction, 1♠ should show spades. Else why didn't you start with 2♥? Is there any way to show spades?

[Zelandakh]

jogs, on 2016-November-09, 13:50, said:

Maybe in a contested auction, 1♠ should show spades.

You realise that transfers in competition are one of the fastest growing methods in the international game, right?

[aguahombre]

hoofie, on 2016-November-08, 16:31, said:

The double was not a negative double it showed 4 plus spades (1s would have showen clubs)

Whilst 1S then 4S would have shown a better hand than 4S in an uncontested auction that did not apply here as 4S could now be a stretched bid on an originally invitational hand

Does that change anyone's' view?

It probably won't change the view of the posters of items 11, 12, and 13. They didn't read the OP response structure as presented the first time. No reason they would read yours.

[Zelandakh]

Just for reference, I thought it might be good to post Ben's Equality structure for 1m - (1♥). He also uses a couple of additional responses to take pressure off of the double:-

1m - (1♥)
==
X = 4+ spades
1♠ = 5+ om; or a balanced hand unsuitable for nat 1/3NT bid
1NT = natural, NF
2♣ = 4+ spades
2♦ = 5+ spades
2♥ = constructive raise
2♠ = fit jump
2NT = very preemptive or game force
3♣ = preemptive but better than 2NT
3♦, 3♠ = fit jumps
3♥ = stopper ask
3NT = To play
--

I quite like Phil's concept, where 2♦ is weak or GF and 2♠ natural and invitational, as that fits well with how I think of this type of structure. I think the most important part of a full transfer scheme is that it fits together in a logical and integrated way with as few exceptions as possible though. It seems clear from the experiences of those playing these methods that having only double for the spade hands is too little though, with 2♦ being an obvious candidate call for taking some of the excess load.

[jogs]

Zelandakh, on 2016-November-09, 14:53, said:

You realise that transfers in competition are one of the fastest growing methods in the international game, right?

And I don't like it. How does one show spades?

[rhm]

MrAce, on 2016-November-07, 12:19, said:

5♠, denying ♥ control.

Zelandakh, on 2016-November-08, 04:36, said:

What would you do now with a hand where you really wanted to invite if the opps did not compete further but are willing to upgrade now that they have shown a heart fit?

That is why 5♠ is not asking for heart control in such auctions. It is inviting.
This hand is probably good enough to jump to 6♠, but if I would bid 5♠ I would do it for different reasons than MrAce.
It is unlikely that we have two losers in hearts

Rainer Herrmann

[Jinksy]

jogs, on 2016-November-10, 08:51, said:

And I don't like it. How does one show spades?

Maybe double to show 4+ spades would be a useful convention, the way they do, for eg, in the OP?

[Zelandakh]

jogs, on 2016-November-10, 08:51, said:

And I don't like it. How does one show spades?

Please refer to the post directly above yours!

[nullve]

http://www.bridgebas...on-these-spots/

[jallerton]

lamford, on 2016-November-07, 05:35, said:

---

IMPs. Your go.

You are playing transfer responses to 1C, and 1S on the first round would have shown clubs. And what do people think of playing 4C/4D by North on the first round as slam-tries in hearts/spades respectively?

Your proposed meaning for 4♦ has some merit, but I consider using a jump in partner's suit to show a slam try in RHO's suit to be utterly ridiculous.

On the actual bidding problem I would bid 5♠ natural and invitational. Maybe 5♥ should also show a strong one-suiter (and once in a while we'll want partner to declare to protect his ♥Kx), but we probably haven't discussed its meaning.

[Phil]

Jinksy, on 2016-November-09, 10:09, said:

Is that after either 1m opening and a 1♥ overcall, or do you something different after a 1♦ opening?

After 1D things are pretty much standard.

Think you know that 1D is unbalanced so there's less reason to try to use transfers.

[cherdano]

Zelandakh, on 2016-November-09, 14:53, said:

You realise that transfers in competition are one of the fastest growing methods in the international game, right?

Having just one forcing way to show spades in this auction is really bad IMO. Lots of IMPs are decided in decisions whether to compete in spades over their heart fit.

[lamford]

jallerton, on 2016-November-11, 17:12, said:

Your proposed meaning for 4♦ has some merit, but I consider using a jump in partner's suit to show a slam try in RHO's suit to be utterly ridiculous.

On the actual bidding problem I would bid 5♠ natural and invitational. Maybe 5♥ should also show a strong one-suiter (and once in a while we'll want partner to declare to protect his ♥Kx), but we probably haven't discussed its meaning.

I think you knew that 4C/4D were proposed as slam tries in hearts/spades respectively depending on which suit was overcalled, so I expect your comment was for amusement only. I was not advocating making a slam try in overcaller's suit. Even if a club can be two, one might still want 4C as pre-emptive however, and 4D can be the slam-try in the unbid major. After 1C-(1D), I think it is right to use 4C/4D as hearts and spades respectively, slam-try, before they raise to 5D.