[straube]

Sorry if I've posted about this before, but we're gearing up for the GNTs and I'm proofreading our notes and see we have after a nebulous limited 1D and 3C interference...

1D (3C)
...............3D-GI+ hearts
...............3H-GI+ spades
...............3S-stopper ask or diamonds


which I think we did to match our

1N (3C)
...............3D-GI+ hearts
...............3H-GI+ spades
...............3S-stopper ask or diamonds

so I can see some use for the transfers after 1N but our 1D doesn't have to be balanced and catering toward stopping on a dime is cross-purposed whenever opener doesn't have tolerance.. Shouldn't we switch to forcing natural bids for 1D (3C) which necessarily requires a bit more strength?

And how about the 1N (3C) transfers? Are we better off natural here, too?

[awm]

It does make some sense to play the same method here, because while 1♦ is not always balanced, it's extremely likely to be. Anyway it seems like you could sim it. Basically:

Your current method wins when responder has a 6-card major and about 8-11 hcp. You gain a bid on this hand, while in natural methods the hand becomes awkward, so I'd expect the win to be pretty significant.

Natural wins when responder has diamonds, but doesn't just want to play 3NT any time opener has a stopper. This is a bit more difficult to formulate but I'd think it comes down to the following types:

1. 5+♦ AND a 4M. Bidding 3♦ natural lets you explore major fits and also get to 3NT; in your current scheme I guess you double but this can be awkward in some sequences.
2. 5+♦ and some slam interest, but not the sort of hand that can almost blast (so maybe 17-19 total points counting shape).

My guess is that this would be reasonably close.

[awm]

I should mention there are also some "auction tempo" differences that are probably break even. For example in your current transfer method, 5♠+club stop+GF becomes easy to bid because you transfer and then bid 3NT, whereas 5♠+no club stop+GF becomes harder to bid because you can either show the spades and then guess your next call, or do something like double or stopper ask that could miss a fit. For natural it's exactly the opposite -- 5♠+no club stop+GF is super-easy to bid (just 3♠ forcing and partner will help you out) whereas 5♠+club stop+GF is difficult because partner may bypass 3NT when he has no fit and no stopper after you bid 3♠ (or you can double but possibly miss a spade fit, etc).

My guess is that these are kind of a push. I do wonder if (in your current method) it would be good to play 3♦...3♠ as a stopper ask with 5+♥ rather than showing both majors (since most/all both majors hands can double).

[straube]

Thanks for your analysis. I took your suggestion and looked at some hands and was surprised at the number of competitive hands with a 6M there were. Also double handles most but not all of the diamond/major hands. Anyway, it was enough to make me consider reinstating 1D (2M) 2N as Lebensohl

[Zelandakh]

I would tend to agree with Adam on 3♦->3♠ (you have both X and 4♣ for hands with both majors) and think the transfer scheme makes perfect sense. My instinct is that the gains on the 6cM hand will overshadow the minuses but am willing to change my mind if a sim shows otherwise.