[DavidKok]

While there are many different ways to play T-Walsh this is not the style I'd advocate, and also not an approach that I think is mainstream. Accepting the transfer to show 3 is a somewhat popular approach, but usually not at the cost of all else.

[jillybean]

---

[DavidKok]

South should rebid 1NT rather than 2♥. On this auction there is no safety at the 2-level with a five card suit, especially since partner will likely raise (directly or delayed) with an unbalanced hand with three card support.

[jillybean]

DavidKok, on 2024-April-21, 06:23, said:

While there are many different ways to play T-Walsh this is not the style I'd advocate, and also not an approach that I think is mainstream. Accepting the transfer to show 3 is a somewhat popular approach, but usually not at the cost of all else.

My agreement is accepting the transfer shows 2+, unless we have a more descriptive bid.
I haven’t had the chance to play with my TW partner for a while but I am always looking at hands with a TW approach for practice.

Mike, yes 1nt above must be to play , just checking as few bids appear to be natural in this system.

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean, on 2024-April-21, 09:02, said:

My agreement is accepting the transfer shows 2+, unless we have a more descriptive bid.
<snip>

The question is, what does "more descriptive" mean, if you have 2+ hearts.
Rebidding 2H after 1S risks playing the 5-1, and this even holding diamond values,
because breaking the xfer will most often indicate a single with this agreement.

[mikeh]

P_Marlowe, on 2024-April-21, 11:43, said:

The question is, what does "more descriptive" mean, if you have 2+ hearts.
Rebidding 2H after 1S risks playing the 5-1, and this even holding diamond values,
because breaking the xfer will most often indicate a single with this agreement.

Test

To heck with being worried about a 5-1 heart fit! While that’s the most likely outcome, what should partner do with say AJxx void KQx Qxxxxx?

The cardinal rule in misfit auctions where one has NO extras or no great suit, is to pass at one’s first opportunity. Sure, 2H in a 6-0 fit is no fun, but get any higher and not only might you make things worse, but the opps may start doubling. Not to mention that partner, whose strength is only approximately known, might take you seriously. Thus rebidding 3C would be something I’d do on AJxx void Axx KQJxxx. Opposite xx AJxxxx xxx Ax I’m happy in 3N, and he should at least try for it, but AJxx void KQx Qxxxxx is unlikely to bring it home.

Breaking the transfer should, imo, deny 3 hearts almost 100%. However, with something like AJxx Kxx x AKxxx, I’d bid 1S, which is rarely passed (and is often one of the best spots when it is), intending to next bid 2H (if available, including if partner bids 2C as xyz) to show 4=3=1=5 with at least some extras.

Breaking the transfer with 4=2=2=5 is more nuanced and id usually not do it….but much depends on how one plays 1C 1D 1H 1S

I’ve seen lots of different schemes but what I play is that 1S is non-forcing….anything up to a bad invite. Opener will raise to 2S with any hand with 4…and can bid 3S with, say, 4=2=2=5 and a good 15 or better.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I was just talking about the 5-1 to illustrate that the 2H bid wa misguided, to put it mildly.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[helene_t]

I think I would raise 2♥ to 3♥ but it's close and somewhat depending on style. If the 2♥ rebid is 4-10 points we have to guess, I prefer to have some subset of that range in the jump shift so that the 2♥ rebid by responder becomes more narrowly defined. Obviously if 2♥ is 4-8 points, we have an easy pass.

Thinking about it, 3♦ is available as a subtle heart raise also, I am not sure what the difference is between 3♦ and 3♥. Maybe 3♦ shows this specific hand, it wouldn't be illogical: Partner, I have an anti-positional diamond stopper, if that is useful you may consider accepting with 3nt instead of 4♥.

[mw64ahw]

jillybean, on 2024-April-20, 18:18, said:

Before I continue the auction above, Id like to ask a question about a t-Walsh auction

---

After opener broke the transfer, is a 1nt rebid my responder to play?

In one version of my T-Walsh variations this transfer break shows 4xx6 with 2♦ showing a 4315 shape with 15-17 or 18+ without a 4-card Major. The transfer break to 1N shows 15-17 42(52) or (332)6

I also play direct WJS up to 8hcp with 8-10hcp going via the transfer, but as above I don't have the issue of opener being short in a Major suit unless long ♣

[jillybean]

P_Marlowe, on 2024-April-21, 11:43, said:

The question is, what does "more descriptive" mean, if you have 2+ hearts.
Rebidding 2H after 1S risks playing the 5-1, and this even holding diamond values,
because breaking the xfer will most often indicate a single with this agreement.

P_Marlowe, on 2024-April-21, 13:02, said:

Hi,

I was just talking about the 5-1 to illustrate that the 2H bid wa misguided, to put it mildly.

With kind regards
Marlowe

This pair is not playing transfer Walsh , the 2H bidder has no reason to believe North doesn’t have 2 or 3 hearts.

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean, on 2024-April-23, 08:43, said:

This pair is not playing transfer Walsh , the 2H bidder has no reason to believe North doesn’t have 2 or 3 hearts.

In a standard system, the seq. also showes 6+

[jdiana]

P_Marlowe, on 2024-April-23, 08:56, said:

In a standard system, the seq. also showes 6+

Does it? Responder's first bid promised four hearts. I would read his second bid to show exactly what he had - about 6-9 points and 5+ hearts. He might have 6 but it isn't promised. 1NT might have been a better bid but I don't think 2♥ is unreasonable. As opener, I'd be torn between passing and bidding 2NT. For better or worse, I'd probably bid 2NT. That's actually a bit of an underbid, since I'd make the same bid with 13 points, but it feels like a misfit and I'm looking for the best part score. (Although I agree with mikeh in general that, when we have a misfit, it's usually best to stop digging a hole for ourselves asap.)

[DavidKok]

In standard the rebid also shows six. Again, with three and an unbalanced hand partner will usually make a direct or delayed raise. There is therefore no real need to bid your five card suit, and in fact it is very risky to do so anyway.

[jdiana]

DavidKok, on 2024-April-23, 14:12, said:

In standard the rebid also shows six. Again, with three and an unbalanced hand partner will usually make a direct or delayed raise. There is therefore no real need to bid your five card suit, and in fact it is very risky to do so anyway.

Interesting. I guess I've been playing it wrong all this time. My (somewhat loose) rule of thumb has been that a rebid promises at least one more than I promised last time. Maybe it's related to whether (how often?) opener will raise responder's major with three cards. We rarely do that. I'll have to go back and review the basics of standard bidding (yet again).

[jillybean]

I think the 2♥ rebid occurs for 2 reasons, not understanding partners ability to show a direct or delayed 3 card raise and an aversion to playing 1nt, some players end up contorting their hand to avoid being left in 1nt.

[jillybean]

jdiana, on 2024-April-23, 14:34, said:

Interesting. I guess I've been playing it wrong all this time. My (somewhat loose) rule of thumb has been that a rebid promises at least one more than I promised last time. Maybe it's related to whether (how often?) opener will raise responder's major with three cards. We rarely do that. I'll have to go back and review the basics of standard bidding (yet again).

I think that's typically what players are taught to do, as responder, to rebid a 5 card major.
Without the understanding or methods for opener to show a 3 card raise, bidding 2M to show 5 isn't such a bad bid. This is another one of the "rules" players are taught without any consideration of better methods, but you've got to start somewhere.

[smerriman]

jdiana, on 2024-April-23, 14:34, said:

Interesting. I guess I've been playing it wrong all this time. My (somewhat loose) rule of thumb has been that a rebid promises at least one more than I promised last time. Maybe it's related to whether (how often?) opener will raise responder's major with three cards. We rarely do that. I'll have to go back and review the basics of standard bidding (yet again).

You could be mixing it up with the situation where opener rebids 1nt - in that case it only shows 5. But that's because you know you have 2 cards opposite and no chance of game.

[jdiana]

smerriman, on 2024-April-23, 14:50, said:

You could be mixing it up with the situation where opener rebids 1nt - in that case it only shows 5. But that's because you know you have 2 cards opposite and no chance of game.

Probably so. (I agree with others that a 1NT bid by responder would have been better on this hand.)

[helene_t]

jdiana, on 2024-April-23, 14:34, said:

Interesting. I guess I've been playing it wrong all this time. My (somewhat loose) rule of thumb has been that a rebid promises at least one more than I promised last time. Maybe it's related to whether (how often?) opener will raise responder's major with three cards. We rarely do that. I'll have to go back and review the basics of standard bidding (yet again).

There's a difference between opener's and responder's bidding.

Opener tends to describe their hand, so bidding the same suit twice should ideally show a 1-suited hand, i.e. a 6-card suit. But 5431-shapes that can't bid the second suit without reversing are awkward, and then it is French style to bid the 5-card suit twice, while it's American style to try to find some other rebid so that rebidding the suit is almost always 6 (except after a 2-level response, then rebidding the opening suit is a waiting bid that is done on most minimum hands, even when balanced).

Responder takes a more pragmatic view, when making a weak bid that is likely to end the auction they should bid what is more likely to be the better contract. Repeat a 5-card suit is, then, not great as it can lead to a 5-0 fit on a bad day. So if you have at least half a stopper in the unbid suit, 1NT is better.

It is true that agreements about opener showing 3-card support weights in, but even without agreements about that, it's generally better to risk loosing the 5-3 fit than to risk playing in a 5-1 fit.

[jdiana]

Thanks for the comments everyone. They all make sense. Another reason that a 1NT bid would be better on this particular hand is that it very clearly describes responder's strength (6-10 HCP). Responder really shouldn't raise to the two level with fewer than 10 points.