Transfer responses

[David Stevenson]

I am told that come players, notably come quite good players, play
transfer responses after their partner's opening bid was doubled for
takeout. I am not referring to a short club, after which transfers are
common with or without a double, but a sequence such as

1S (Dbl) 2C

Is it possible for someone to tell me how they play this and what
advantages are perceived? Notably do you play it only at the 2-level,
or at the 1- and 2-levels?

--
David Stevenson Bridge RTFLB Cats Railways
Liverpool, England, UK bluejak on BBO Mbl: +44 7778 409 955
<webj...@googlemail.com> EBL TD Tel: +44 151 677 7412
bluejak666 on Skype Bridgepage: http://blakjak.org/brg_menu.htm

[Travis Crump]

On 06/25/2012 11:51 AM, David Stevenson wrote:
>
> I am told that come players, notably come quite good players, play
> transfer responses after their partner's opening bid was doubled for
> takeout. I am not referring to a short club, after which transfers are
> common with or without a double, but a sequence such as
>
> 1S (Dbl) 2C
>
> Is it possible for someone to tell me how they play this and what
> advantages are perceived? Notably do you play it only at the 2-level,
> or at the 1- and 2-levels?
>

How I play it:
over 1H/S-X
1N shows clubs
2C shows diamonds
over 1H
1S is natural(forcing)
2D shows a 3 card raise ~7-9 HCP
2H is preemptive- 3 cards 2-6 points
over 1S
2D shows hearts
2H shows a 3 card raise ~7-9 HCP
2S is preemptive- 3 cards 2-6 points

Opener completes the transfer if he would have passed a non-forcing
natural bid. Otherwise does something sensible.

Responder can then pass to show a 5+ biddable suit and less than opening
hand. Or he can bid a new suit/NT to show a game force[NT shows a
one-suiter in the suit shown since a balanced hand would XX]. Or he can
raise partner to show a limit raise with 3 card support and 5+ in the
suit transferred to. Or he can raise himself to show 6+ in his suit and
an invite.

Advantages:
Allows responder to bid on more hands obstructing the auction
Doesn't force responder to XX with hands that have no interest in defending.

[Adam Beneschan]

On Monday, June 25, 2012 8:51:35 AM UTC-7, David Stevenson wrote:
> I am told that come players, notably come quite good players, play
> transfer responses after their partner's opening bid was doubled for
> takeout. I am not referring to a short club, after which transfers are
> common with or without a double, but a sequence such as
>
> 1S (Dbl) 2C
>
> Is it possible for someone to tell me how they play this and what
> advantages are perceived? Notably do you play it only at the 2-level,
> or at the 1- and 2-levels?

I was going to recommend looking up "Cappelletti over 1 of a major doubled" (or C/1MX), but my own attempts to Google it resulted in broken links and out-of-stock booklets. I think this included transfers. It was somewhat popular for a while maybe 10-15 (?) years ago... I'm mentioning it in case anyone has more info.

-- Adam

[David Goldfarb]

In article <Ch+PtsKH...@blakjak.demon.co.uk>,

David Stevenson <webj...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> I am told that come players, notably come quite good players, play
>transfer responses after their partner's opening bid was doubled for
>takeout. I am not referring to a short club, after which transfers are
>common with or without a double, but a sequence such as
>
>1S (Dbl) 2C
>
> Is it possible for someone to tell me how they play this and what
>advantages are perceived? Notably do you play it only at the 2-level,
>or at the 1- and 2-levels?

I used to play this with Don Varvel. The biggest advantage, to my mind,
is that you get two ways to raise the major: with 0-6 and 3-card support
you can bid 2M directly as an obstructive move, and with a constructive
raise you bid 2 of the suit below.

If the opponents don't compete, you can get fit-jumps without the jump
by transferring and then supporting opener's major, combined with also
being able to transfer and then pass, with a weak 1-suited hand.

The downsides are that you lose the natural 1NT response, and that if
the opponents do compete (which they are pretty likely to do) you may
have to guess whether to go to the three-level. We had some situations
where opener feared to complete the transfer at the three-level lest
responder be weak, and then responder feared to go to the three-level
lest opener have a misfit.

The structure goes:

1S-(X)-:
1NT: clubs, 5 or more;
2C: diamonds
2D: hearts
2H: constructive raise of spades
2S: junky raise of spades

1H-(X)-:
1S: natural, forcing
2C: diamonds
2D: constructive raise of hearts
2H: junky raise of hearts

--
David Goldfarb |"The only thing better than messing with somebody's
goldf...@gmail.com | sense of reality is messing with a whole LOTTA
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | people's sense of reality...."
| -- J. Michael Straczynski

[Nick France]

On Jun 25, 11:51 am, David Stevenson <brid...@nospam.demon.co.uk>
wrote:

>    I am told that come players, notably come quite good players, play
> transfer responses after their partner's opening bid was doubled for
> takeout.  I am not referring to a short club, after which transfers are
> common with or without a double, but a sequence such as
>
> 1S (Dbl) 2C
>
>    Is it possible for someone to tell me how they play this and what
> advantages are perceived?  Notably do you play it only at the 2-level,
> or at the 1- and 2-levels?
>
> --
> David Stevenson            Bridge      RTFLB     Cats         Railways
> Liverpool, England, UK     bluejak on BBO        Mbl: +44 7778 409 955

> <webjak...@googlemail.com>       EBL TD          Tel: +44 151 677 7412

> bluejak666 on Skype        Bridgepage:http://blakjak.org/brg_menu.htm

The Basic sequences of Cappelletti over one of a major Doubled is as
follows

After 1S - (X)

2H - a good spade raise (7-9 points)
2S - bad spade raise (4-6 points)
2C - Transfer to diamonds. Partner bids 2D with a hand that would
pass a weak hand with diamonds
2D - Transfer to hearts (usually 6). again partner bids 2H with a
hand that would pass a weak hand with hearts.
1NT - Transfer to clubs with the following bids by responder after a
2C bid by opener
Pass - a weak hand with clubs
2S - two card spade support with 7-9 points and no outside 5
card suit (except maybe clubs) (KS style)
2D - 5 card diamond suit with 2 card support for partner and
7-9 points (KS style)
2H - 5 + heart suit with 2 card support for partner and 7-9
points (KS style)
2NT - 4333 ten or eleven point hand with an honor in partner's
suit.

After 1H - (X) the bids have the same general meaning with 2D as the
good raise (7-9 points) and the sequence of 1H - (X) - 1S is natural.

He suggested that jumps to the 3 level be fit showing jumps and 2NT be
a major suit raise limit or better.

Except for hands with good trump support and 10 or more points you
redouble

There are several advantages

1) you get to show more types of hands at a lower level.

2) if responder passes the transfer you have the doubler on opening
lead

You give up the natural 1NT bid but Cappelletti is a believer of the
KS concept that of playing in the 5-2 major fit is superior to playing
in 1NT (he quotes a statistic that this is true more than 70% of the
time but I would question that).

My partner and I modified the system slightly by making all limit
raises going thru 1M - (X) - 1NT. Now when responder rebids 2NT it
shows an honor in the trump suit and 3 of the major denies an honor.
1M - (X) -2NT was a game forcing raise.



Nick France

[blackshoe]

On Monday, June 25, 2012 3:17:31 PM UTC-4, Adam Beneschan wrote:

> I was going to recommend looking up "Cappelletti over 1 of a major doubled" (or C/1MX), but my own attempts to Google it resulted in broken links and out-of-stock booklets. I think this included transfers. It was somewhat popular for a while maybe 10-15 (?) years ago... I'm mentioning it in case anyone has more info.

I have the old C/1MX booklet, and the newer "Gimmicks and Gadgets" booklet, which includes a brief description. There is also a new version of the former called "Cappelletti over doubled majors" covering C/1MX, C/2MX, and C/1MNX. Baron Barclay, according to their website, has both of the latter in stock. Nick France's description (see down thread) is how I learned it.

[Chris xxxxx]

On Jun 25, 11:51 am, David Stevenson <brid...@nospam.demon.co.uk>
wrote:

>    I am told that come players, notably come quite good players, play
> transfer responses after their partner's opening bid was doubled for
> takeout.  I am not referring to a short club, after which transfers are
> common with or without a double, but a sequence such as
>
> 1S (Dbl) 2C
>
>    Is it possible for someone to tell me how they play this and what
> advantages are perceived?  Notably do you play it only at the 2-level,
> or at the 1- and 2-levels?

The most common agreements are the Cappelletti over one of a major
doubled that Nick France posted, and the version with the minor
variation that 1NT actually promises clubs (and you start with a pass
with hands that would have bid 1NT). In both cases, it is common and
sensible to use the bid that shows the constructive raise, followed by
bidding again, to show a 3-card limit raise.

In other words, the most common agreement is that the transfers begin
with 1NT and end with the bid below the single raise. This is a clear
improvement on standard, since you can handle both constructive and
forcing one-suiters in lower-ranking suits. Without using transfers,
you either had to play non-forcing new suits at the two-level (and
redouble with all forcing hands, even with a 6 or 7-bagger) or use
forcing bids at the two-level and give up on showing your AQ10xxx and
out.

There are folks who play transfers starting with the redouble. This
is usually because they play transfers in competition over 1H
overcalls of 1-minor and 1S overcalls of 1H. So, if you would
normally defend a 1H overcall of 1D by using X = 4+ spades, 1S =
balanced values (right-siding NT by putting the overcaller on lead),
etc., it's natural to defend 1D-X with XX = hearts, 1H = spades, and
1S = balanced values. In such a system you pass with a hand that
would have redoubled for business. I have to admit, I find transfers
at the one-level to be a nice defense to 1H overcalls, but I don't
like them so much over doubles (but will play them if partner
insists).

Christopher Monsour

[David Stevenson]

David Stevenson wrote

>
> I am told that come players, notably come quite good players, play
>transfer responses after their partner's opening bid was doubled for
>takeout. I am not referring to a short club, after which transfers are
>common with or without a double, but a sequence such as
>
>1S (Dbl) 2C
>
> Is it possible for someone to tell me how they play this and what
>advantages are perceived? Notably do you play it only at the 2-level,
>or at the 1- and 2-levels?

Judging by the answers so far, there seem to be the following.

#1 Transfers from 1NT to the suit below 2M
#2 Transfers from 2C to the suit below 2M, plus a 2-way 1NT
#3 Transfers at 1-level plus

The last does not interest me.

I am thinking of playing #1, though #2 is interesting.

Now, I play an Acol approach. 4+ card majors, though 5 cards is
guaranteed unless the hand has 15+ HCP. Currently I play

1M x 2m as 8+, 4+ cards
1S x 2H as 8+, 5+ cards

Our rebids are

New suit is one round force, showing 5-4
2M is minimum, 5+ cards
Raise is minimum, 4+ cards [3+ for 3H over 2H]
Reverse/2NT/High reverse/jump rebid in own suit are natural, game
forcing

So, how to translate the above structure?

For example:

1H x 2C p
2D F, 5-4
2H 5 cards, 11-14
2S GF, 5-4
2NT GF, 15+
3C 4 cards, 11-14
3D Shortage, 4+ Cs
3H GF, good 6+ cards
3S Shortage, 4+ Cs
3NT 18-20, 2=5=2=4

The problem is that if

1H x 1NT may be weaker with long clubs [how weak]? it is fairly obvious
that 2C covers a lot of minimum or better hands. So how strong? Should
I be playing other rebids the same shape and forcing quality, but a bit
stronger?

And, of course, how does responder rebid after

1H x 1NT p
2C p ?

[Michael Angelo Ravera]

On Monday, June 25, 2012 8:51:35 AM UTC-7, David Stevenson wrote:

> I am told that come players, notably come quite good players, play
> transfer responses after their partner's opening bid was doubled for
> takeout. I am not referring to a short club, after which transfers are
> common with or without a double, but a sequence such as
>
> 1S (Dbl) 2C
>
> Is it possible for someone to tell me how they play this and what
> advantages are perceived? Notably do you play it only at the 2-level,
> or at the 1- and 2-levels?

The biggest advantage comes when a 1C or 1S bid is doubled.
Both the 1D and 1NT responses are less useful natural bids, especially after a double.
The advantage is the normal one for a transfer. Namely, the same bid can be both forcing and nonforcing. In addition, especially when playing weak 1NT openers, after a 1C opener gets doubled, you can suggest playing in diamonds while preempting the 1-level and still get out in 1NT.

The usual rebids are that Opener accepts the transfer, if he could have passed a nonforcing bid of the destination suit and makes a natural bid otherwise. Usually, accepting the transfer implies an honor singleton or any two or more cards with no rebiddable suit (543H or 5422 or flatter). With a rebiddable suit (6322 or more shapely) or if the advancer bids, accepting the transfer should imply an honor doubleton or any three cards support.

Over 1C-(X)-? I play:
1D shows hearts
1H shows spades
1S shows diamonds
1NT show an invitational club raise
2C shows a nuisance raise of clubs

You can reverse the nuisance and invitational raises, if you like. You can also reverse the 1S and 1NT bids, so that 1S is the invitational club raise and 1NT shows diamonds.

Over 1S-(X)-?
1NT shows clubs
2C shows diamonds
2D show hearts
2H shows an invitaional spade raise
2S shows a nuisance spade raise.

With most partners with whom I play transfers over opponents' doubles, I play that 1R-(X)-1M is natural and that transfers start at 1NT as follows:
1R-(X)-1NT shows clubs
1D-(X)-2C is an invitational raise of diamonds
1H-(X)-2C shows diamonds
1D-(X)-2D is a nuisance raise of diamonds
1H-(X)-2D is an invitaional raise of hearts
1H-(X)-2H is a nuisance raise of hearts

As I said before, you can reverse the invitational and nuisance raises, if you want to, but I don't see much advantage. To the contrary, transfering with a nuisance raise gives opponents a chance to make a penalty double fo the suit used in the transfer to show a desire to play in it. As a general philosophy, nuisance raises are most useful when they are natural.

If Opener declines the transfer or passes after advancer bids, Responder bids again with either a 7-card suit or invitational values not implied in the initial response.

Most people who play transfers agree that jumps in a new suit over the double are somewhat fit showing, but that is more of a convenience than a requirement.

[agum...@gmail.com]

On Monday, June 25, 2012 8:51:35 AM UTC-7, David Stevenson wrote:

> I am told that come players, notably come quite good players, play
> transfer responses after their partner's opening bid was doubled for
> takeout. I am not referring to a short club, after which transfers are
> common with or without a double, but a sequence such as
>
> 1S (Dbl) 2C
>
> Is it possible for someone to tell me how they play this and what
> advantages are perceived? Notably do you play it only at the 2-level,
> or at the 1- and 2-levels?

Transfer after a takeout double are described in the Robson Segal book. It applies only after a 1M opening and the transfers start from 1NT:
1M -- (X) -- ?
1NT --> clubs
2C --> diamonds
2D --> hearts
2H --> 3-card constructive raise to 2S or better
2S = weak raise to 2S
2NT = 4 card LR +

The advantages are:
1. two raises to 2M
2. ability to direct a lead and then raise (transfer to a suit then pref back to partner's major)
3. ability to bid a long suit with weak, inv or GF values.

You get more ways to raise and unburden the xx of certain distributional hand types plus all hands with fits. Your only loss is the natural 1NT bid. Transfers are also used in this auction: (1m) -- 1M -- (X) -- ? since once again a natural 1NT has low utility. They can be used here as well: 1H -- (1S) -- ? but most people dont since most prefer to retain a natural 1NT.

It is possible to use a transfer approach at the 1-level after a 1m opening too.
1C -- (X) -- ?
xx --> 10+ HCP balanced
1D --> Hearts
1H --> spades
1S --> no major
1NT = natural

1D -- (X) -- ?
XX --> Hearts
1H --> spades
1S --> no major
1NT = natural

Advantages of the transfer:
Opener has two ways to describe a major suit fit for responder
* He accepts at the 1-level on 3-card support or a balanced min with 4-card support.
* His 2M super accept promises 4-card support and a non min enabling aggressive game tries.
* His 1NT rebid denies 3-card support for responder


Other advantages:
* When responder is weak, the contract can play in 1M (if the opponents allow it)
* When responder is weak, the hand will often play better from opener's side.
* Transfers allow more control over which side declares a final NT contract.

1C -- (X) -- 1S:
This sequence denies a major and the ability to bid 1NT. Responder has 7+ minor cards but too few clubs to raise. It is more difficult for the opponents to bid over than a 1D response and provides an alternative to 1NT when responder's hand is not suitable for declaring NT.

1D -- (X) -- 1S
This sequence gives responder a descriptive call when he holds: xx, xxx, Qxx, AQxxx without stealing the NT declaration from opener.

The only loss is the strong xx after the 1D opening.

[Chris xxxxx]

And after the 1H and 1S openings....

Christopher Monsour

[Lorne]

On 28/06/2012 05:30, agum...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Your only loss is the natural 1NT bid.

Not so. Playing Davids methods a 2N rebid and a reverse are game
forcing, but if partner has transfered to a minor on a 5 count and 6
card suit you can no longer play that. The key issue for David is how
he restructures openers rebids now that 15+ is not enough to game game
force.

I think there is a big dofference here between a weak NT structure and a
strong NT one. After 1M (x) 2any (P) opener in David's methods he
either has 15+ or an unbalanced hand with 5+ in the opening suit (even
if that suit is a minor) so a big advatage is playing a forcing 2N rebid
(he must be 15+ if balanced) and the 3N rebid as a mild (balanced) slam
try in responders suit which is not possible if playing transfers so you
have to rejig openers rebids. I think that is what David wants to know
about but I suspect few have thought it through for a weak NT structure.

[David Stevenson]

Lorne wrote

It has been suggested to me by three people whose views I have often
found persuasive that the best solution is to complete the transfer on
any minimum hand.

1S p 2C p
2D F2H
2H Min, say 11-14
2S FG
2NT FG, 15+
3C Min, say 11-14
3D QGF, splinter
3H FG, good 6+ suit
3S QGF, splinter
3NT 18-20, 5=2=2=4

QGF = Quasi game force: shows the values for game but may stop at 4m

1S x 1NT p
2C Any minimum
2D F2H, 14+
2H Medium, say 14-17
2S FG, 17+
2NT FG, 18+
3C Medium, say 14-17
3D QGF, splinter
3H FG, good 6+ suit, 17+
3S QGF, splinter
3NT ?????????

The general idea is that opener's rebids are about 3 HCP stronger to
make up for the response being abo9ut 3 HCP weaker. Of course there
will come a day where the opening suit is so good and the fit so bad
[7=3=3=0 comes to mind!] that a 2S rebid is made light but that is
hardly the end of the world.