[cloa]

---

Is this just a perfect example? West would be safe in 3♥. Sure 4♥ as a somewhat preempt is possible but that might be a cue on the system or still a standard responsive bid but stronger and longer. So use 3♦ as a transfer bid to ♥ and double as a transfer to diamonds perhaps suggesting 4H (especially with against vulnerability or neutral). I've been googling but transfer competitive bidding doesn't turn up much.

[glen]

cloa, on 2011-May-24, 18:49, said:

... use 3♦ as a transfer bid to ♥ and double as a transfer to diamonds perhaps suggesting 4H (especially with against vulnerability or neutral) ...

You would trade all the hand types covered by a negative double just for "double as a transfer to diamonds"? I much prefer a Bergen switch here, 3♦ transfer to ♥s, 3♥ game force with ♦s and denying 4+♥s.

[shevek]

Hardly a perfect example.
It would a bit better if 4♥ was failing but bidding game is clear with 8 hearts & ♣K.
Also no good over a 3♦ overcall since need double with 4♥s.

[straube]

When you employ a transfer, you prevent partner from bidding the transfer suit naturally.

So 1S (3C) 3D P 3H doesn't show hearts.

This stands to lose when responder has a forcing hand with diamonds...particularly when he has side hearts.

Also, when partner accepts the transfer it's hard to know how much support he has. You have to reserve a checkback bid (such as a cue bid) to find out and there's a cost associated with doing so.

I think it's hard to stop on a time at the 3-level, such as a transfer would try to do. How often do those weak 8-cd suits come along? Also, why wouldn't opener want to do more than accept the 3H bid with 16 points?

[han]

I play that 3D shows hearts (10+ points) and 3H shows diamonds (GF). Not sure if it is good, I only play it when the two suits are a major and a minor.

With the given hand I'd bid 4H. You know what they say, preempt over a preempt.

[gnasher]

han, on 2011-May-25, 00:15, said:

I play that 3D shows hearts (10+ points) and 3H shows diamonds (GF). Not sure if it is good, I only play it when the two suits are a major and a minor.

If you're going to play something like this, isn't it better to play
3♦ = hearts
3♥ = spades
3♠ = diamonds (GF)

Over a 3♦ overcall, you could swap the majors, so
3♥ = spades
3♠ = hearts (GF)
but I don't think this is a good idea, because you lose the ability for opener to show spades opposite responder's hearts.

[whereagles]

cloa, I've once desgined a post-overcall transfer scheme and played it a few times with a regular partner. It was a nightmare to remember all the stuff and possible cases.

Unless you're a professional, I suggest you stick to normal methods. The potential gains of playing a more elaborated scheme come up far too rarely ro make it worth memorizing the whole thing.

[fromageGB]

glen, on 2011-May-24, 19:15, said:

You would trade all the hand types covered by a negative double just for "double as a transfer to diamonds"?

Yes. Maybe I have not been negative doubling on the right hands, but I have found that playing and going off in a misfit is a common consequence.

straube, on 2011-May-25, 00:06, said:

When you employ a transfer, you prevent partner from bidding the transfer suit naturally.

Of course. Any bid you make prevents him from bidding a lower ranking suit unless he raises the level - nothing different in that.

straube, on 2011-May-25, 00:06, said:

So 1S (3C) 3D P 3H doesn't show hearts.
This stands to lose when responder has a forcing hand with diamonds...particularly when he has side hearts.

Not so. Responder doubles to transfer to diamonds and then rebids 3♥ forcing.

straube, on 2011-May-25, 00:06, said:

Also, when partner accepts the transfer it's hard to know how much support he has. You have to reserve a checkback bid (such as a cue bid) to find out and there's a cost associated with doing so.

The way my partnership plays is that the transfer is compulsory, unless partner wishes to continue opposite a weak2 sort of hand. This is the assumption. If he wishes to raise a weak 2 he simply bids game; if he bids a new suit it is forcing, a rebid of his opening is to play. So stopping at the 3 level is easy.

straube, on 2011-May-25, 00:06, said:

How often do those weak 8-cd suits come along? Also, why wouldn't opener want to do more than accept the 3H bid with 16 points?

8 is of course rare, but we do it with 6 and shortage in overcaller's and partner's suits, with 5 if we are going to follow up with another bid. Opener may jump to game with 16 or better, but if that's the wrong bid, you can't win them all after a preempt.

I would also dispute that this is for professionals. What is difficult to remember that calls from double up to the one beneath opener's suit are transfers? Not only does it allow you to play in a "weak 2" sort of hand, or bid diamonds forcing as well as show hearts (as above), but it is a simple way of making an invitational raise of partner distinct from a 3bid to play.

[dake50]

"You would trade all the hand types covered by a negative double just for "double as a transfer to diamonds"? I much prefer a Bergen switch here, 3♦ transfer to ♥s, 3♥ game force with ♦s and denying 4+♥s." --glen

** Thus losing the xfer scheme able to show good S-raise by 3H
** (the suit below a raise) verses a competing S-raise: 3S.
** Too much to lose when a fit happens.

[Quantumcat]

You guys haven't heard of Switch yet?

The way I play it:
Up to an overcall of 2♥, 3-way switch: double is a transfer to the first unbid suit, the first unbid suit is a transfer to the second unbid suit, the second unbid suit is a non-forcing takeout double, notrumps and our suit are natural, their suit is a cue-raise. A jump in the first unbid suit is a forcing takeout double, a jump in the second unbid suit is a forcing bid of the first unbid suit (have super offensive hand, don't want double to be passed out).

The main attractant is that you can pass out a double from being short in partner's suit, which is what we like to have to defend. Opener no longer needs a stack in their suit to pass (the takeout double implies definite shortness, but the transfer-double doesn't).

2♠ and above, the two unbid suits are switched, notrumps and our suit are natural, their suit is still a cue-raise, and X is takeout.

[matmat]

perfect hand to defend 3♣, imo.
(so long as we're resulting).

I don't see how holding eight trump we can possibly justify stopping short of game opposite an opener.If i had a transfer, or something related, available, I'd be doing that and then raising to game.