[tomcat777]

2♠ transfer to♣ then 3♦

[apollo1201]

Sry for the digression but can someone pls explain why 2NT is better w/o fit vs. 2NT = super acceptance? If respondent is very weak the hand needs to be played in 3C regardless of the fit so to rightside the contract, 3C = no fit (most common answer) is best. When opener super accepts, some of the weak hands will choose 3NT so less hands will be played in 3C anyway so no need to have them bid by opener.
Or did I miss sth?
I agree on 2NT openings, opener bids NT if he doesnt like respondent's minor, but in that case responder is GF+, not here.

[Cyberyeti]

apollo1201, on 2016-April-29, 12:07, said:

Sry for the digression but can someone pls explain why 2NT is better w/o fit vs. 2NT = super acceptance? If respondent is very weak the hand needs to be played in 3C regardless of the fit so to rightside the contract, 3C = no fit (most common answer) is best. When opener super accepts, some of the weak hands will choose 3NT so less hands will be played in 3C anyway so no need to have them bid by opener.
Or did I miss sth?
I agree on 2NT openings, opener bids NT if he doesnt like respondent's minor, but in that case responder is GF+, not here.

Interesting question to which a sim would be enlightening

For hands that want to play in 3♣:

Opposite a 12-14 1N I suspect no fit is most common, opposite a 15-17 I'm not so sure and would be interested to know.

[gszes]

dboxley, on 2016-April-28, 06:48, said:

p shows game interest opposite many weak hands so opener has a fairly exceptional hand. These exceptional hands are almost always those with lots of controls though sometimes they are merely max hands with a problem with 3n and at least a 3 card club fit. AKx Axxx Kxx Kxx or AKJ AQJ xxxx Qxx. Since 3n is still a viable option it looks best for now to proceed with a
simple

3d



While this bid does not promise a dia suit <to me anyway to others it will> (and there may be other bidding mechanisms available to the partnership that guarantee this is not a dia suit--that we are unaware of) it definitely points out a problem with 1 or both of the majors for 3n. We will have to sit and wait to see what opener says before we proceed since they know what their hand looks like a lot better than we do at this time:) If the partnership is playing these 3lvl bids as splinter then I would go ahead and bid 3h.

It is important to note that the 3d (or 3h) bid shows some extra values (GF at worst) since it takes more power to make 5m than 3n. This extra power (along with opener's super accept means the partnerships is at worst VERY close to slam. This shared knowledge leaves most of the 4 level open for slam exploration if the partnership needs it.

[rmnka447]

I'm following up the transfer with 3 ♦ also. It still keeps 3 NT in play, but warns partner about my hand being mostly minor cards. If partner has good major stoppers and wants to bid 3 NT fine. Otherwise, it keeps all alternatives open.

If you think bidding the minors gives the opponents too much information, then I'd submit that an immediate 3 NT bid certainly encourages the lead of a major anyway.

[overruff42]

I like 2S, to be followed by 3D, which must show a game forcing minor 2 suiter

[hrothgar]

overruff42, on 2016-April-29, 14:36, said:

I like 2S, to be followed by 3D, which must show a game forcing minor 2 suiter

Some people use that to show a single suited in clubs with short diamonds

[GrahamJson]

apollo1201, on 2016-April-29, 12:07, said:

Sry for the digression but can someone pls explain why 2NT is better w/o fit vs. 2NT = super acceptance? If respondent is very weak the hand needs to be played in 3C regardless of the fit so to rightside the contract, 3C = no fit (most common answer) is best. When opener super accepts, some of the weak hands will choose 3NT so less hands will be played in 3C anyway so no need to have them bid by opener.
Or did I miss sth?
I agree on 2NT openings, opener bids NT if he doesnt like respondent's minor, but in that case responder is GF+, not here.

One reason is that if the bidding goes 1NT - 2S -2NT (SA) - 3C both opponents know that responder is weak but with a good fit. This enables both to come into the auction, for example with a TOX. Playing 3C as the SA only one oppo has the opportunity to bid once knowing the fit.

A second reason applies to the auction 1NT - 2NT. Playing 3D as the SA enables 2NT to be bid on weak 5-5 hands. If opener bids 3D then you have found a good fit, if he bids 3C responder can pass as opener is likely to hold better clubs than diamonds.

Incidentally, I have used SA to mean Super Accept although I don't think for minor suits it requires the same conditions as for a major, when a SA takes the level one higher. For auctions starting 1NT -2D a SA requires a maximum and good four card support. For auctions starting 1NT -2S a bid of 3C just requires three to a top honour. This allows responder to try 3NT if he has a good six card suit and no other values. I guess that a SA would be, say, 3H, which would show a max with good four card support (together with, I suggest, a doubleton in the bid suit).

[apollo1201]

Thanks Graham. All that makes sense. And I like the weak 55 possibility to transfer in D's. I used "supper accept" with a lack of better term (I'm not a native speaker), maybe "shows enthusiasm" is better

[dboxley]

dboxley, on 2016-April-28, 04:34, said:

IMPs, Both Vul,
15-17, 4 suit xfers w/super accept (immediate 3C response would be Puppet), no other special agreements , opponents pass throughout.

---

***********************************************
Interesting posts so far...

OK, here is where we are now:

Partner
1NT
2NT super accept
3♠ no agreement

You
2♠ -> Clubs
3♦ GF with something in diamonds (again, no special agreements)
?
************************************************

I will update the bidding as we go along.

[Cyberyeti]

4♦ kickback.

3♠ should show values in spades and little in hearts, looking for some help for 3N.

The worry is a hand like AKxx, Jxx, Kxx, KQx where you have no parking place for your slow diamond loser, but he might have J♠ or Q♥ instead of the J.

[gszes]

dboxley, on 2016-April-30, 03:50, said:

***********************************************
Interesting posts so far...

OK, here is where we are now:

Partner
1NT
2NT super accept
3♠ no agreement

You
2♠ -> Clubs
3♦ GF with something in diamonds (again, no special agreements)
?
************************************************

I will update the bidding as we go along.

3s should show reasonable "stuff" in spades and "worry" about hearts. My feeling is that having only the ace in a worry suit (where partner most likely has little length) qualifies as a problem. I think we are looking at little/no "stuff" in hearts or only the ace. In either case, our hand has dramatically improved. Given the bidding so far it seems highly improbable we do not belong in at least a small slam. So the question becomes do we continue to search for more with our limited agreements or blast. We cannot bid 4n here since that could be taken as quant with hearts stopped but not spades. Given our limited agreements is it safe to continue to search or should we blast? I vote for

4c

in order to show partner our slam interest and give partner a chance to cue bid (4h). This also focuses on clubs more than diamonds since we could have also bid 4d here. Note that this is perfectly safe since the earlier bidding has forced us to at least 4n. P may bid 4d to focus on diamonds vs clubs and while that is a pain it is not deadly as we can follow with our 4h shortness. If p cannot bid 4d or 4h then we should settle for 6c without further messing around.

[Tramticket]

GrahamJson, on 2016-April-30, 02:47, said:

One reason is that if the bidding goes 1NT - 2S -2NT (SA) - 3C both opponents know that responder is weak but with a good fit. This enables both to come into the auction, for example with a TOX. Playing 3C as the SA only one oppo has the opportunity to bid once knowing the fit.

Thank you, I've learned something! I knew about the possibility of 2NT with 5-5, but this is a stronger reason.

[arock]

In my simple World I would bid 1 Club, forcing my P to bid his longest/strongest suit and go from there.

[miamijd]

apollo1201, on 2016-April-29, 12:07, said:

Sry for the digression but can someone pls explain why 2NT is better w/o fit vs. 2NT = super acceptance? If respondent is very weak the hand needs to be played in 3C regardless of the fit so to rightside the contract, 3C = no fit (most common answer) is best. When opener super accepts, some of the weak hands will choose 3NT so less hands will be played in 3C anyway so no need to have them bid by opener.
Or did I miss sth?
I agree on 2NT openings, opener bids NT if he doesnt like respondent's minor, but in that case responder is GF+, not here.

For a variety of reasons, if you play 4 suit transfers, it's best to play 2s as range finder or clubs. That is, you bid two spades on hands with clubs, but also on hands that would have invited game with 2nt or slam with 4nt in old fashioned Goren. Partner bids 2nt with a min and 3c with a max. After 2nt, responder can pass with the invite hand, bid 3c with the weak club hand, bid 3of another suit to show a gf in clubs (usually the bid suit shows shortness), bid 3nt with the slam invite, and so on

If partner bids 3c, then responder can pass with the weak club hand and so forth

Using this method means 2c guarantees a 4 card major, which eliminates a couple of awkward auctions and permits better treatments for auctions like 1nt 2c 2d/h. 2s

Cheers,
Mike

[lyk]

2

dboxley, on 2016-April-28, 04:34, said:

IMPs, Both Vul,
15-17, 4 suit xfers w/super accept (immediate 3C response would be Puppet), no other special agreements , opponents pass throughout.

---

Partner
1NT

You
?

I will update the bidding as we go along.

[yusuf]

1 N 2♠
2N. 3♥ 3(2),1,4,5(6)

[maartenxq]

dboxley, on 2016-April-28, 04:34, said:

Partner
1NT

You
?

Tell what you have, ie minors and slam interest. Then partner can make a decision how to proceed. So 2 S and after partners bid 3 D. If P does not move 3 nt it will be. After superaccept I will move forward myself to 6 or even 7 with enough key cards.

Maarten Baltussen

[rmnka447]

I'm with gszes and bidding 4 ♣ next.

[Winstonm]

hrothgar, on 2016-April-28, 06:24, said:

Torn between 2♠ and an immediate 3N

Me, too, and as I cannot see why I should assume my Qx, and K in the majors are a problem, and if they are my hand is worth even less, so I am just bidding 3NT.