[dicklont]

This week I held xx QJ10xx Axx HJx

Playing 2/1 my partner opened:
1♠ - 1NT
2NT = 18/19 balanced

Which agreements are standard here?
Should I just bid 3NT or is there a way to find a 5-3 fit in ♥?

[thebiker]

I don't know what is standard
I normally play that 3C and 3D are nf long suits and that 3H shows 5+ and is forcing - thats what some Acol players appear to play

regards
Brian Keable
alias thebiker

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

Depending what a in a new suit would show
instead of 1NT, you cant bid 3C,3D,3H and 3S,
since those bid,could be passed, this wont happen
very often, but it will at least sometimes.
And those bids should at least 6 cards.

So all in all, I would say you cant.
I think those problem gets solved, if you happen
to play that 2C by opener is conventional (=forcing),
lookup Bart, Gazilli, ... whatever.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Gerben42]

I would bid 3♥ now, forcing. With 6♥ you can bid 4♥ directly, partner must have 2 to bid 2NT.

[helene_t]

The only discussion I have seen on this was in a bidding contest in the Dutch BF magazine: Wijma-Brulleman play 3♥ as forcing but 3m as non-forcing. Dunno if this is standard. Maybe some play Woolf here, in which case 3♥ would be forcing while 3♣ would be a sign-off in some non-club suit (puppet to 3♦).

[FrancesHinden]

You have to play 3♥ as forcing here, or how else will you ever bid your 5-3 heart fit?

[SoTired]

Old goren standard was any bid over 2N was forcing, which makes sense. Seems strange to try to save opener from 2N with 18-19 when responder did not pass at the expense of all 3-level actions seems ridiculous. So weak hands just have to pass and hope.

So any 3-level action should be forcing. Whether 3H shows 5 or 6 is debatable, but 5 makes more sense as 6 can bid 4H or 3H then 4H to show a stronger hand with mild slam interest. If responder bids 3H, opener with 3+ support should q-bid a minor in case responder has slam interest.

[han]

I really like transfers here.

[mikeh]

I join the transfer bandwagon. They are easy to use (altho there are some wrinkles to be aware of especially after 1minor 1major 2N) and very, very powerful compared to standard methods.

Here, you transfer to 3♥ and bid 3N to offer a choice of games.

Absent this or other agreements (Wolff, reverse Wolff etc) you have to bid 3♥. This has to be played as forcing. Yes, it is better non-forcing when you hold a very weak hand with 6 hearts, but the gains from being able to sign off are less than the losses from not being able to show hearts below game while maintaining a force.

Of course, transfers let you have your cake and eat it too.. which is part of their power: with the garbage hand, transfer and pass.

[Cascade]

3♥ = Five hearts and is forcing

4♥ = Six hearts

3♥ then 4♥ over 3NT shows a better hand with six hearts

Out of curiousity what is your club holding?

[kenrexford]

Standard is natural and forcing.

Wolff or Transfers are better than standard, IMO.

I think transfers make the most sense when Opener has spades and Opener rebids 2NT after 1NT.

[rbforster]

I understand that it might be useful to transfer and pass with a weak hand and a long suit. Similarly, I can see that transferring to hearts and then bidding 3N or 4♥ would be nice to accept (and hopefully right-side) game with 5 or 6+ hearts respectively.

han, on Feb 7 2008, 11:44 AM, said:

I really like transfers here.

Am I right in assuming by "transfers" you mean this:

1♠-1N-2N:

3♣ showing ♦
3♦ showing ♥
3♥ showing ♠
3♠ showing ♣
(or is it 3♠ transfer to 3N to play, and 3N transfer to clubs?)

A few questions for anyone who plays this -

- Does a transfer to spades show a 3 card limit raise? (and then 3N is choice of games?)

- If you transfer to say diamonds and return to NT, are you offering a choice of 5♦ vs 3N, or a slam try in diamonds or what?

- How does the transfer to clubs work? Is opener expected to bypass 3N to bid 4♣ just so responder can sign off? Or is opener supposed to cater to the potential choice of games (3N vs 5♣) and bid his game preference (3N or 4♣) and let responder pass/pull/raise appropriately?

kenrexford, on Feb 7 2008, 12:38 PM, said:

I think transfers make the most sense when Opener has spades and Opener rebids 2NT after 1NT.

I agree that transfer to spades seems silly unless you play some sort of very odd 1NT response over 1♥. Wouldn't it make more sense to play something like this:

1♥-1N-2N:
3♣ weak signoff
3♦ weak signoff
3♥/3♠/3N 3 out of 4 of: natural raise to 3N, limit raise in ♥, strong clubs, strong diamonds

[csdenmark]

dicklont, on Feb 7 2008, 10:46 AM, said:

This week I held xx QJ10xx Axx HJx

Playing 2/1 my partner opened:
1♠ - 1NT
2NT = 18/19 balanced

Which agreements are standard here?
Should I just bid 3NT or is there a way to find a 5-3 fit in ♥?

The problem bid here is 2NT. Use 'New minor forcing'.


1♠-1NT-2♣=New Minor Forcing
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♦=5+♥
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥=*If 12-17cP: Trans -> ♠ *If 18+cP: ASK attitude
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥-2♠=12-17cP
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥-2♠-Pass=To Play
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥-2NT=18-19HcP,bal

[skjaeran]

Do most people in the rest of the world play 2NT as 18-19 here?
In Norway it's standard among top players to play 2NT as a conventional GF. Not sure for how long, but it's probably like 15 years since I started playing that.

[mikeh]

csdenmark, on Feb 7 2008, 01:49 PM, said:

dicklont, on Feb 7 2008, 10:46 AM, said:

This week I held xx QJ10xx Axx HJx

Playing 2/1 my partner opened:
1♠ - 1NT
2NT = 18/19 balanced

Which agreements are standard here?
Should I just bid 3NT or is there a way to find a 5-3 fit in ♥?

The problem bid here is 2NT. Use 'New minor forcing'.


1♠-1NT-2♣=New Minor Forcing
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♦=5+♥
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥=*If 12-17cP: Trans -> ♠ *If 18+cP: ASK attitude
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥-2♠=12-17cP
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥-2♠-Pass=To Play
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥-2NT=18-19HcP,bal

This scheme makes absolutely no sense at all unless you play that 2♣ is forcing, and even then there are problems, and the use of 2♣ forcing in this auction is sick in a natural method with 5 card majors and forcing 1N responses.

[cherdano]

mikeh, on Feb 7 2008, 01:09 PM, said:

csdenmark, on Feb 7 2008, 01:49 PM, said:

dicklont, on Feb 7 2008, 10:46 AM, said:

This week I held xx QJ10xx Axx HJx

Playing 2/1 my partner opened:
1♠ - 1NT
2NT = 18/19 balanced

Which agreements are standard here?
Should I just bid 3NT or is there a way to find a 5-3 fit in ♥?

The problem bid here is 2NT. Use 'New minor forcing'.


1♠-1NT-2♣=New Minor Forcing
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♦=5+♥
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥=*If 12-17cP: Trans -> ♠ *If 18+cP: ASK attitude
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥-2♠=12-17cP
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥-2♠-Pass=To Play
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥-2NT=18-19HcP,bal

This scheme makes absolutely no sense at all unless you play that 2♣ is forcing, and even then there are problems, and the use of 2♣ forcing in this auction is sick in a natural method with 5 card majors and forcing 1N responses.

Wow Mike, these are strong words given that some of the strongest players in the world play 2♣ as forcing here (Gazzilli).

[mikeh]

cherdano, on Feb 7 2008, 02:57 PM, said:

mikeh, on Feb 7 2008, 01:09 PM, said:

csdenmark, on Feb 7 2008, 01:49 PM, said:

dicklont, on Feb 7 2008, 10:46 AM, said:

This week I held xx QJ10xx Axx HJx

Playing 2/1 my partner opened:
1♠ - 1NT
2NT = 18/19 balanced

Which agreements are standard here?
Should I just bid 3NT or is there a way to find a 5-3 fit in ♥?

The problem bid here is 2NT. Use 'New minor forcing'.


1♠-1NT-2♣=New Minor Forcing
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♦=5+♥
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥=*If 12-17cP: Trans -> ♠ *If 18+cP: ASK attitude
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥-2♠=12-17cP
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥-2♠-Pass=To Play
1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥-2NT=18-19HcP,bal

This scheme makes absolutely no sense at all unless you play that 2♣ is forcing, and even then there are problems, and the use of 2♣ forcing in this auction is sick in a natural method with 5 card majors and forcing 1N responses.

Wow Mike, these are strong words given that some of the strongest players in the world play 2♣ as forcing here (Gazzilli).

Read my post again

I said 'unless you play 2♣ forcing'. Obviously, if you use Gazilli or related methods, you have an agreement as to how you handle some 5233 minimums, and so on. I meant my comment in the context of the OP problem: clearly he wanted to know continuations after 2N 18-19, not to suddenly invent an artificial method over 1N. OTOH, maybe what I see as obvious, isn't

I am NOT criticizing Gazilli or similar gadgets... altho to suppose that a relatively inexperienced player can simply agree to play 2♣ forcing here, in the context of a natural 5 card major forcing method seems to me to be silly.

[cherdano]

Ok, if "and the use of 2♣ forcing in this auction is sick in a natural method with 5 card majors and forcing 1N responses" was meant as "you need artificial followups to an artificial forcing 2♣", then I agree, but that is certainly not how I understood your post, and not how I understand it after having read it again, either.

[I agree with all the rest of your posts, btw. Sorry, on a nitpicking trip again ]

[matmat]

csdenmark, on Feb 7 2008, 01:49 PM, said:

The problem bid here is 2NT. Use 'New minor forcing'.

if we are going to discuss the demerits of

1apple-1nt
2nt

then might as well go on record and say they should open a strong artificial 1♣ instead.

I like transfers. I'm ok with Wolff and there really is no problem playing natural. I'd imagine that the system win/yield of using either of the first two isn't that great.