Transfer Walsh
mike
response to a 1C opener) recently, it looks good. I have a couple of
questions...
Has anyone made 'completing the transfer' to a major include any hands
other than those with 3 card support, or taken stronger hands out of
the transfer acceptance hence making it non-forcing? If so, what?
Is there any reason why it wouldn't work in a weak/mini NT
partnership? Should the stronger NT rebid mean that some slightly
weaker hands should not suppress diamonds (i.e. longer diamonds
are not suppressed by hands that want to force to game opposite a 1NT
rebid)?
Thanks,
Mike
Reading, UK
Gerben Dirksen
> I have been reading some old postings on Transfer Walsh (transfers in
> response to a 1C opener) recently, it looks good. I have a couple of
> questions...
>
> Has anyone made 'completing the transfer' to a major include any hands
> other than those with 3 card support, or taken stronger hands out of
> the transfer acceptance hence making it non-forcing? If so, what?
Hands with 4-card support that would normally rebid 2NT also accept
the transfer. If you don't you can get awkwardly high on a hand type
that is likely to find a slam. With only 3-card support and maximum
balanced you can still rebid 2NT.
> Is there any reason why it wouldn't work in a weak/mini NT
> partnership? Should the stronger NT rebid mean that some slightly
> weaker hands should not suppress diamonds (i.e. longer diamonds
> are not suppressed by hands that want to force to game opposite a 1NT
> rebid)?
I never tried it but I think you'll be in trouble, consider these two
hands after 1C - 1S (diamonds). I think it's playable if you rebid 2C
on unbalanced hands with only 5C. Remember, partner has no 4-card
major so you are very likely to have a minor suit fit.
1C - 1S - ?
Kxxx
Qxx
x
AQxxx
Partner has at least 5D, no 4H and no 4S. We have at most 13 cards in
the majors (if partner is 33), so at least 13 cards in the minors. We
have a 5-2 fit in clubs or a 6-1 fit in diamonds. At MP this may be
worse than 1NT, at IMPs it is no problem.
Just wondering, will you rebid 1NT on Kxxx AQx x AQxxx after 1C - 1S,
playing a strong NT? This is basically the same problem.
Gerben
Michael Barel
> mike <mi...@bellfamily.org.uk> wrote in message
> news:<b3e64af...@RiscPC02.reading.fourcom.com>..
>> (transfers in
>> response to a 1C opener) recently, it looks good. I have a couple of
>> questions...
>>
>> Has anyone made 'completing the transfer' to a major
>> include any hands
>> other than those with 3 card support, or taken stronger hands out of
>> the transfer acceptance hence making it non-forcing? If so, what?
>
> Hands with 4-card support that would normally rebid 2NT also accept
> the transfer. If you don't you can get awkwardly high on a hand type
> that is likely to find a slam. With only 3-card support and maximum
> balanced you can still rebid 2NT.
>
I would like to add another question :
How do you respond with a strong (GF+) hand with 5D+4M ?
Does 1S have to deny a major, in addition to showing diamonds?
And also , is there some special recommended meaning for the 2D
response, when playing Transfer Walsh?
Michael
--
Direct access to this group with http://web2news.com
http://web2news.com/?rec.games.bridge
Micha Keijzers
> I have been reading some old postings on Transfer Walsh (transfers in
> response to a 1C opener) recently, it looks good. I have a couple of
> questions...
>
> Has anyone made 'completing the transfer' to a major include any hands
> other than those with 3 card support, or taken stronger hands out of
> the transfer acceptance hence making it non-forcing? If so, what?
I have not played the acceptance as non-forcing, although you could ask
yourself if completing te transfer should still be forcing after a 3rd
or 4th hand opener. I think it still should be forcing for reasons I
will state below.
So, now those reason. Related is whether you accept with certain strong
hands and we do that in my T-Walsh partnerships. The strongest hand we
accept with is the less than 4 loser hand with a long club suit headed
by at least two of top three honors and 4- (or even 5-) crd support.
That's because an auction like 1C-1D-4C shows less than that. Something
like xx,KJ10x,A,AQJxxx would be a 1C-1D-4C, but x,AQJx,Ax,AKxxxx is a
1C-1D-1H-some-4C. The other strong hands with which we accept are 18-19
balanced with 3crd support and 17-19 with 4crd support.
>
> Is there any reason why it wouldn't work in a weak/mini NT
> partnership?
A weak or mini NT complicates things a bit. Not when playing plain
T-Walsh, but if you would like to play 1C-1D/1H-accept-2C as a relay,
asking for clarification (Crowhurst it is named by Brüggeman/Willemsens
in their BruWil book) you need to think about that a bit. This relay is
intended to find out opener's range and handtype. Whether he is balanced
or unbalanced, minimum or maximum? How many clubs he has, etc. Now, this
is not so much the case after 1C-1D-1H-2C, since you could play 1S as a
one round force in 1C-1D-1H-1S and consequently discover the spade fit,
but it is in the sequence 1C-1H-1S-2C. Since there is a need to discover
the 4-4 heart fit if there exists one, you need to have responses to 2C
that show something about heart length. Now, responses do interfere with
each other while in the 1C-1D-1H-2C-case you can have simple responses
like (directly out of the back of my head, since they are so easy to
remember):
2D: unbalanced minimum, 12-14, 3crd hearts
2H: balanced minimum, 12-14, 3crd hearts (this becomes 15-17 when
playing a weak NT and consequently GF)
2S: 15-17, unbalanced, 3crd hearts
2NT: 18-19, balanced, 3crd raise
3C: 17-19, 6+ clubs, 3crd raise
3D: 17-19, 1-3-4-5
3H: 17-19, 2-4-2-5
3S: 17-19, 4-3-1-5
3NT: 17-19, balanced, 4crd raise
4C: super fit-bid, less than or equal to ~4 losers
higher can be void showing responses or so.
If you like you can ask further after 2D, with 2S, with responses like
the ones in the above scheme, but for the 12-14 HCP-range. After 2H you
can ask for full distribution (plenty of room). After 2S the same story
as after 2D and after 3C you can relay for the short suit if there is
one, etc., etc. Plenty of opportunities.
However, try to modify the above scheme when playing a mini or weak NT.
That becomes more difficult and you can easily see why. Try it.
> Should the stronger NT rebid mean that some slightly
> weaker hands should not suppress diamonds (i.e. longer diamonds
> are not suppressed by hands that want to force to game opposite a 1NT
> rebid)?
Yep, the standard Walsh-principle applies: 1C-1S-1NT-2S is GF with
longer diamonds than spades.
Also, some recent developments in the Netherlands suggest to use 1S as a
transfer to 1NT and 1NT as a diamond hand. I have not looked into that
yet (I will some day hopefully), but that seems worth a look. If you
decide on that you could play transfers also at the two level (I believe
judging from a very quick look at the article (published in IMP, a Dutch
bridge magazine)).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
> Reading, UK
Cheers, Micha
Nijmegen, Netherlands
Micha Keijzers
Oh yeah, that's something where a weak/mini NT would cause some
problems. After 1C-1S you are stuck with all kinds of hands. However,
playing 1S as a transfer to 1NT and 1NT as diamonds could maybe give
some relief there. So, that's worth considering.
The other think worth considerin: I play an alternating NT, weak, if
non-vulnerable (I'm a chicken vulnerable :-) ), strong otherwise and I
explicitly discussed the sequence 1C-1S-2C with partner. You could agree
that 1C-1S-2C-2D is non-forcing, where normally this wouldn't make any
sense, since 2C should already be a playable spot, but consider the hand
Gerben mentions. It's the question what you rebid with those and there's
even a worse situation if you hold AKxx,Kxxx,x,Qxxx, playing a weak NT.
What to rebid??? Or shouldn't you open this one. That goes too far by my
standards. Therefore we have agreed that 2D is non-forcing after
1C-1S-2C. If you think 2D is a better spot then just bid it.
>
> Gerben
Cheers, Micha
Nijmegen, Netherlands
Micha Keijzers
> Gerben Dirksen wrote:
>
>>mike <mi...@bellfamily.org.uk> wrote in message
>>news:<b3e64af...@RiscPC02.reading.fourcom.com>..
>>
>>>I have been reading some old postings on Transfer Walsh
>>>(transfers in
>>>response to a 1C opener) recently, it looks good. I have a couple of
>>>questions...
>>>
>>>Has anyone made 'completing the transfer' to a major
>>>include any hands
>>>other than those with 3 card support, or taken stronger hands out of
>>>the transfer acceptance hence making it non-forcing? If so, what?
>>
>>Hands with 4-card support that would normally rebid 2NT also accept
>>the transfer. If you don't you can get awkwardly high on a hand type
>>that is likely to find a slam. With only 3-card support and maximum
>>balanced you can still rebid 2NT.
>>
>
>
> I would like to add another question :
> How do you respond with a strong (GF+) hand with 5D+4M ?
Simple! As in standard Walsh, you bid 1S and whatever partner bids, you
bid 2M, GF. (Theoretically speaking you could agree that it's merely
invitational (but forcing for one round) I guess.)
> Does 1S have to deny a major, in addition to showing diamonds?
No.
>
> And also , is there some special recommended meaning for the 2D
> response, when playing Transfer Walsh?
Well, I play it as showing either a GF hand with long diamonds or a 7-9
club raise. Straight out of Romex :-)
>
> Michael
Cheers, Micha
Nijmegen, Netherlands
mike
Micha Keijzers <mickey17...@nospam.netscape.net> wrote:
> Gerben Dirksen wrote:
> >
> > I never tried it but I think you'll be in trouble, consider these two
> > hands after 1C - 1S (diamonds). I think it's playable if you rebid 2C
> > on unbalanced hands with only 5C. Remember, partner has no 4-card
> > major so you are very likely to have a minor suit fit.
> >
> > 1C - 1S - ?
> >
> > Kxxx
> > Qxx
> > x
> > AQxxx
> >
> > Partner has at least 5D, no 4H and no 4S. We have at most 13 cards in
> > the majors (if partner is 33), so at least 13 cards in the minors. We
> > have a 5-2 fit in clubs or a 6-1 fit in diamonds. At MP this may be
> > worse than 1NT, at IMPs it is no problem.
> >
> > Just wondering, will you rebid 1NT on Kxxx AQx x AQxxx after 1C - 1S,
> > playing a strong NT? This is basically the same problem.
I agree with what you said above, rebid 2C.
> Oh yeah, that's something where a weak/mini NT would cause some
> problems. After 1C-1S you are stuck with all kinds of hands.
What hands are there that don't have (slightly stronger) equivalents
when playing a strong NT?
>However,
> playing 1S as a transfer to 1NT and 1NT as diamonds could maybe give
> some relief there. So, that's worth considering.
> The other think worth considerin: I play an alternating NT, weak, if
> non-vulnerable (I'm a chicken vulnerable :-) ), strong otherwise and I
> explicitly discussed the sequence 1C-1S-2C with partner. You could agree
> that 1C-1S-2C-2D is non-forcing, where normally this wouldn't make any
> sense, since 2C should already be a playable spot, but consider the hand
> Gerben mentions. It's the question what you rebid with those and there's
> even a worse situation if you hold AKxx,Kxxx,x,Qxxx, playing a weak NT.
I have just been thinking about this hand, I know my partner will
say we should open it 1NT! We are currently playing 10-13 at all vuls
btw! :s I don't think choosing a strong NT is a question of being a
wimp, it's not the risk of a large penalty that would make me want to
change back to a stronger NT, more the belief that losses from
pre-empting yourself out of a fit exceeding the losses from
pre-empting the opps, and -200 vul against their part-score.
> What to rebid??? Or shouldn't you open this one. That goes too far by my
> standards. Therefore we have agreed that 2D is non-forcing after
> 1C-1S-2C. If you think 2D is a better spot then just bid it.
Thanks both, that's a very good point, will discuss with p.
Mike
Reading, UK
Micha Keijzers
> In message <3ED23C37...@nospam.netscape.net>
> Micha Keijzers <mickey17...@nospam.netscape.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Gerben Dirksen wrote:
>>
>>>I never tried it but I think you'll be in trouble, consider these two
>>>hands after 1C - 1S (diamonds). I think it's playable if you rebid 2C
>>>on unbalanced hands with only 5C. Remember, partner has no 4-card
>>>major so you are very likely to have a minor suit fit.
>>>
>>>1C - 1S - ?
>>>
>>>Kxxx
>>>Qxx
>>>x
>>>AQxxx
>>>
>>>Partner has at least 5D, no 4H and no 4S. We have at most 13 cards in
>>>the majors (if partner is 33), so at least 13 cards in the minors. We
>>>have a 5-2 fit in clubs or a 6-1 fit in diamonds. At MP this may be
>>>worse than 1NT, at IMPs it is no problem.
>>>
>>>Just wondering, will you rebid 1NT on Kxxx AQx x AQxxx after 1C - 1S,
>>>playing a strong NT? This is basically the same problem.
>>
>
> I agree with what you said above, rebid 2C.
>
>
>>Oh yeah, that's something where a weak/mini NT would cause some
>>problems. After 1C-1S you are stuck with all kinds of hands.
>
>
> What hands are there that don't have (slightly stronger) equivalents
> when playing a strong NT?
Those exist also. However, rebid problems are more common when playing a
weak NT, since the problem hands are more common in the weak NT
situation. It's basically the unbalanced hands that can't support
diamonds and can't rebid 2C. When playing a strong NT these hands have
to be of 15HCPs. Otherwise you reverse and is the problem solved. With
those 15-counts that remain you can improvise. Give a 2C underbid, or
reverse anyway. With the 12-14 hands you could rebid 1NT, although you
are unbalanced and are possibly very short in diamonds. With a weak NT
all this doen not go the same. Now a 1NT rebid shows 15-17, so a
NT-rebid on a weak unbalanced hand with a singleton diamond is out of
the question. That leaves you little option but to rebid 2C, even
holding 4-4-1-4.
>
>
>>However,
>>playing 1S as a transfer to 1NT and 1NT as diamonds could maybe give
>>some relief there. So, that's worth considering.
>>The other think worth considerin: I play an alternating NT, weak, if
>>non-vulnerable (I'm a chicken vulnerable :-) ), strong otherwise and I
>>explicitly discussed the sequence 1C-1S-2C with partner. You could agree
>>that 1C-1S-2C-2D is non-forcing, where normally this wouldn't make any
>>sense, since 2C should already be a playable spot, but consider the hand
>>Gerben mentions. It's the question what you rebid with those and there's
>>even a worse situation if you hold AKxx,Kxxx,x,Qxxx, playing a weak NT.
>
>
> I have just been thinking about this hand, I know my partner will
> say we should open it 1NT! We are currently playing 10-13 at all vuls
> btw! :s I don't think choosing a strong NT is a question of being a
> wimp, it's not the risk of a large penalty that would make me want to
> change back to a stronger NT, more the belief that losses from
> pre-empting yourself out of a fit exceeding the losses from
> pre-empting the opps, and -200 vul against their part-score.
>
>
>>What to rebid??? Or shouldn't you open this one. That goes too far by my
>>standards. Therefore we have agreed that 2D is non-forcing after
>>1C-1S-2C. If you think 2D is a better spot then just bid it.
>
>
> Thanks both, that's a very good point, will discuss with p.
>
> Mike
> Reading, UK
Cheers, Micha
Nijmegen, Netherlands
JonCooke
We used to play the completion as an unblanced hand of traditionally
unbiddable shape.
So - 1C-1D(Hearts)-1H = 5clubs, 4 diamonds.
1C-1H(spades) - 1S = 5clubs, 4 in a red suit.
Gone were the days of playing 2C with 5-4-3-1 responding to 1-4-2-6
All sorts of scope for inventing your own kit here.
mike
mike <mi...@bellfamily.org.uk> wrote:
> I have been reading some old postings on Transfer Walsh (transfers in
> response to a 1C opener)
[snip]
I have been emailed system notes where accepting the transfer shows a
balanced minimum, and bidding 1NT shows 17-19 balanced, which keeps
the auction lower than a standard 2NT rebid. I was wondering - maybe
completing the transfer could show all hands with 3 card support and
17-19 balanced hands with 2 card (and possibly 4 card) support?
Responder initially assumes that opener has exactly 3 card support,
apart from not doing a direct raise to game (1C:1D, 1H:4H) on a 5 card
suit. An extra bid will need to be used for GF hands with 5 hearts.
Apart from that opener just converts a heart raise to NT holding the
17-19 range and a doubleton heart, which immediately shows the extra
values. If you include 17-19 balanced hands with 4 hearts in the
transfer acceptance, these can convert a NT bid to the major in the
same way. Does this sound playable/an improvement?
Thanks,
Mike
Reading,UK
Micha Keijzers
> In message <b3e64af...@RiscPC02.reading.fourcom.com>
> mike <mi...@bellfamily.org.uk> wrote:
>
>
>>I have been reading some old postings on Transfer Walsh (transfers in
>>response to a 1C opener)
>
>
> [snip]
>
> I have been emailed system notes where accepting the transfer shows a
> balanced minimum, and bidding 1NT shows 17-19 balanced, which keeps
> the auction lower than a standard 2NT rebid.
How is the minimum balanced hand without support handled then?
> I was wondering - maybe
> completing the transfer could show all hands with 3 card support and
> 17-19 balanced hands with 2 card (and possibly 4 card) support?
> Responder initially assumes that opener has exactly 3 card support,
> apart from not doing a direct raise to game (1C:1D, 1H:4H) on a 5 card
> suit. An extra bid will need to be used for GF hands with 5 hearts.
Playing T-Walsh it is already quite customary, but not obligatory, to
play 2C as a sort of checkback. Playing the variant above you simply
need it.
I do not like your variant very much. I see problems with the minimum
balanced hands, so I'm very interested in where these go. Weak NT? What
then with the 15-17 (or 14-16) hands? Can you tell more about the
general system structure. How do the 1C-, 1D- and 1NT-openers look like?
> Apart from that opener just converts a heart raise to NT holding the
> 17-19 range and a doubleton heart, which immediately shows the extra
> values. If you include 17-19 balanced hands with 4 hearts in the
> transfer acceptance, these can convert a NT bid to the major in the
> same way. Does this sound playable/an improvement?
Sounds OK, but see my remarks above.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
> Reading,UK
Cheers, Micha
Nijmegen, Netherlands
mike
Micha Keijzers <mickey17...@nospam.netscape.net> wrote:
> mike wrote:
> > In message <b3e64af...@RiscPC02.reading.fourcom.com>
> > mike <mi...@bellfamily.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I have been reading some old postings on Transfer Walsh (transfers in
> >>response to a 1C opener)
> >
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > I have been emailed system notes where accepting the transfer shows a
> > balanced minimum, and bidding 1NT shows 17-19 balanced, which keeps
> > the auction lower than a standard 2NT rebid.
>
> How is the minimum balanced hand without support handled then?
In Paul's system 'Accepting the transfer' shows 11-13 balanced,
instead of showing exactly 3 card support. You have used the extra bid
that you get from playing transfers to ensure you land up in all 8
card major fits and no 7 card fits (except when judgemement tells you
otherwise), he uses it to keep the bidding lower when rebidding
balanced hands without support.
> > I was wondering - maybe
> > completing the transfer could show all hands with 3 card support and
> > 17-19 balanced hands with 2 card (and possibly 4 card) support?
> > Responder initially assumes that opener has exactly 3 card support,
> > apart from not doing a direct raise to game (1C:1D, 1H:4H) on a 5 card
> > suit. An extra bid will need to be used for GF hands with 5 hearts.
>
> Playing T-Walsh it is already quite customary, but not obligatory, to
> play 2C as a sort of checkback. Playing the variant above you simply
> need it.
> I do not like your variant very much. I see problems with the minimum
> balanced hands, so I'm very interested in where these go. Weak NT?
> What then with the 15-17 (or 14-16) hands? Can you tell more about the
> general system structure. How do the 1C-, 1D- and 1NT-openers look like?
In the same way as I think you were describing before - 10-13 balanced
hands are opened 1NT, 14-16 balanced hands with 3 card support accept
the transfer, 14-16 balanced hands with 4 card support raise the suit,
14-16 balanced hands with 2 card 'support' rebid 1NT.
1C and 1D openers are currently opened with the longer minor (clubs
when 3-3), 1NT is 10-13 and can include 4441s if we want it to.
>
> Sounds OK, but see my remarks above.
OK is good, well better than not ok :)
> Cheers, Micha
> Nijmegen, Netherlands
Thanks,
Mike