Re: Responding to the weak nt with a weak hand and a 5 card
major.
|
Otis Bricker
|
Aug 11, 2007 14:02 PDT
|
One other advantage of not using transfers is that it keeps the less
well defined hand hidden. Responder can have 0-11 HCP and the opponents
have to guess whether the goal should be to set you or hold you from an
overtrick. They also know little of your shape while they know a lot
about openers.
Another problem with transfers is that they give RHO two chances to
double. This can let the opponents better describe their hands by
defining the two bids to have different meaning such as the immediate
double shows general strength and a delayed double more distributional
takeout or some such. Add the option for cue that Alvin mentioned and I
prefer to not play them myself. I think that they are useful opposite a
strong NT since game is common and slam is not uncommon. But opposite a
WNT, it is usually a partscore hand, game come up sometimes and slam is
rare.
Quick check shows that opposite a SNT, responder will have <8 hcp about
45.3%, 8-15 about 52.4% and 16+ only a bit over 2.3%. With a WNT, the
numbers shift to <11 being 66, 11-18 33.2 and 19+ .76%
The KS notes do allow for opener to press on after 1N-2M and I find the
methods described adequate. Minimum flat hands pass. Minimums that look
good for M bid 3M and maximums bid 2N or make a SSGT in the doubleton.
Otis
Alvin Bluthman wrote:
| | jerome keslin wrote:
| | Hi,
I'd like to know what tactic the list uses when their partner opens 1nt
and they have a 5 card major with a weak hand, say less than 6 points
I assume that the majority play transfers but maybe I am wrong.
Do they recommend bidding immediately taking the risk that partner may
superaccept and get them to the 3 level, or do they lie low and escape
only if and when the doubling starts?
Are superaccepts recommended when playing the weak nt?
Jerome Keslin
|
Kaplan did not usually play transfers over his weak NT (except when
partnering Oswald Jacoby). A technical objection to transfers is simply
that it gives the opener's RHO the opportunity to double the transfer or
to bid the transferee suit - which may occur more often over weak NTs
than strong. Moreover, superaccepts are risky, as they raise the
auction. Many modern partnerships - including my own KS partnersip with
George Semos - are willing to accept these drawbacks in order to gain
the advantages of transfers, and we are careful to superaccept only with
a supermaximum opening.
Alvin P. Bluthman
apblu-@aol.com
==^================================================================
For help with the list send mail to ad-@tameware.com.
|
|
|
 |
|
