You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.

Jonathan thanks for the excellent report.

An observation re: sources of income. Excuse me in advance if my arithmetic is flawed. Also I round a lot. It struck me that total league membership is approximately the same number (at 160K) as total national tournament entries (annually, approximately 35K tables — 2018 lower, but hopefully an anomaly — for let's say 140K player entries).

160K members, 140K national entries. That comparability makes it easier to assess impacts of income increases. Scrambling about for an additional $1 million income? Raise membership by ~ $7 annually, OR boost table fees at nationals by about the same amount.

You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.

We open 1♣ with any balanced hand not in 1NT range. We announce 1♣ 1♠ as ‘no major’, not guaranteeing long diamonds but often having them.

We'll raise partner's major to 2M with 4 trumps, and either the 15-17 balanced hand or an unbalanced hand with clubs (which usually has the dummy points of the strong notrump). Responder can sort that out if he wishes.

We've tried several variations of what to do with the 1M ‘raise’ and have settled on ‘shows unbalanced 3-fit short of reverse strength’, which seems to work well and occurs often enough. Balanced hands with 3-fit we just rebid notrump and responder can retransfer with 5.

Almost all notrump or major-fit hands are right-sided.

You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.

John: The sims generate the same answers as simple arithmetic. I constrained opener’s hand because this was described as a real-world problem … OP said the opener bid 1♥. So opener gets 5+ hearts, spades are shorter, and minors are not longer.

So. Each sample is 50K. When overcaller is 42xx and opener has a hand he would open 1♥ (constrained as described), partner has 4+ spades 42.7%. When opener’s hand is wide-open except it must have 5+ hearts (might have longer other suits), partner has 4+ spades 41.8%. And when opener’s spades are constrained, but not his minors (he might be 1507), partner has 4+ spades 43.1%. I think the arithmetic used that model.

You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.

OK I simmed the damned thing. Opener has 5+ hearts. Spades are shorter, diamonds and clubs are not longer.

The sim was going to take days to find a significant sample of 4810 hands, so I went with 47xx deals because OP just wants a general answer to his ‘implied fit’ question. If not, he won’t live long enough to be dealt that 8-bagger.

Overcaller’s precise minor-suit distribution is of no consequence I think. So:

When overcaller is 47xx, partner has 4+ spades 50.0%, with average spades = 3.5.

When overcaller is 45xx, partner has 4+ spades 45.3%, with average spades = 3.4

When he is 42xx, partner has 4+ spades 42.6%, with average = 3.3.

You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.

Thanks Bruce

We use them in situations where we don't think we need the classic neg X showing the unbid major. For example, any sequence qualifies where three suits have been bid, partner has bid one of them, and double is a legal call. So for example here (1♣) 1♥ (1♠) ?? and here 1♣ (P) 1♥ (1♠) ?? and here (1♣) 1♥ (P) 1♠; (2♣) ?? etc.

Takes a few sessions to remember to check the position whenever the auction is competitive, and RHO bids a suit lol.

You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.

Yuan thanks for the writeup. I’ve toyed with playing transfers in many of those positions, beginning with Double and ending the suit below opener’s suit. That means you give up negative doubles, and have to use the call for the unbid major to show 4+ cards, not 5+ cards (that call might be a transfer, or might be natural).

(Aside: if playing Flannery, when you open 1♥ there is an excellent chance you don’t have four spades so losing a negative double is often no big deal.)

I think also when the opening is 1M, the major benefit of the transfers is to give you an additional raise type, not to give you an unbid suit transfer.

Depending on what suits are involved, you won’t always have an unbid suit to transfer to.

1♥ (1♠) then

X = clubs (give up neg X) 1NT = natural, has positional value, often clone for neg X 2♣ = diamonds 2♦ = good heart raise 2♥ = noise Higher = normal

However, 1♠ (2♥) then there is no unbid suit transfer

X = good raise 2♠ = noise Higher = normal

1♠ (2♣) then

X = diamonds 2♦ = 4+ hearts 2♥ = good raise 2♠ = noise

1♥ (2♣) then

X = diamonds (how often opener have 4 spades?) 2♦ = good raise 2♥ = noise 2♠ = might be 4

If you did it here, 1♦ (2♣) then

X = good raise 2♦ = noise 2M = 4+

Note in all these sequences the transferer gets to bid again, so the transfer might just be a ‘pause’ for a strong hand. In the sequence immediately above, where X = good diamond raise, responder gets rebid opportunities to pattern-out. Auction might proceed 1♦ (2♣) X (P); 2♦ (P) 2♠; with 2♠ being 1RF at least.

And so on. I’d be interested if anybody has played this style, and the results?

You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.

Yuan will probably get to this, but when we use transfers responder is expected to have some ‘out’ when he makes a suit transfer. He has either a rebiddable suit that is playable opposite shortness, or a strongish hand that can find some rebid, or tolerance for opener's suit. So we would

(1) ‘accept’ transfer with ‘xx’ or better, otherwise rebid his own suit (which responder will pass with tolerance, or rebid his own suit, or show a second suit), or show a second suit

(2) cuebid (General strength) or jump cuebid (GF raise), or jump in partner's suit (invite), etc, lots of options

(3) rebids strongly somehow … usually not a worse ‘problem’ than if responder had bid ‘naturally’

I think you are generally not worse off than if you bid ‘normally’, and sometimes are better off. Responder can show a bad hand but nice rebiddable suit and not get into trouble because the transfer leaves responder in charge.

You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.

It's like any system, has pros and cons. I've played it for years in a weak-notrump context. Occasionally you miss a 5-3 M fit, the same way you'll often miss that fit when you open 1NT with some 5M332. You just double-up on missing those fits lol. And for that matter, we all miss some 5-4 fits when we open 1NT with 5M332.

So although it further clouds your 1♣ openers, it sharpens your 1M (and 1♦) openers. There is a large upside during both auction and defence, to know that partner will usually have shortness somewhere (or extra length, or be 5422 if you don't consider those ‘balanced’). As others have mentioned, the implications flow through much of your system. For example after 1M 1NT, we're able to play transfer opener rebids because clubs are never ‘fake’.

Pretty sure I saw Welland Auken open 1♣ with a 5=2=4=2 hand.

You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.

I get average clubs 4.2 in opener, 3.5 in overcaller, 2.6 in responder, 2.7 in advancer. Makes sense, advancer should equal responder (small rounding difference in above numbers).

You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.

A proper database will be difficult to locate. Here is a crude sim that might get you started. Partner opens 1C (3+, not 5M, diamonds not longer), overcaller is balanced (including 5M332). Sim size is 50K.

When responder has 0-1 clubs (14.2%), opener has 3 clubs 1.2%, 4 = 4.4%, 5= 5.0%, 6+ = 3.6%.

When responder has 2 clubs (27.2%), opener has 3 clubs 3.8%, 4 = 10.5%, 5= 8.8%, 6+ = 4.1%.

When responder has 3 clubs (31.5%), opener has 3 clubs 6.3%, 4 = 14.0%, 5= 8.6%, 6+ = 2.6%.

When responder has 4 clubs (19.1%), opener has 3 clubs 5.5%, 4 = 9.2%, 5 = 3.8%, 6+ = 0.6%.

When responder has 5+ clubs (8.0%), opener has 3 clubs 3.4%, 4 = 3.6%, 5= 0.9%, 6+ = 0.1%.

Read as: When responder has 3 clubs (31.5% of the time), opener will have 4 clubs 14.0% (or 44.4% of the time opener has 3 clubs).

You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.

Before I simmed it, I chose 2♠ thinking a nice cross-ruff might be likely, you might be in a 5-3 fit, and Moysians sometimes play very nicely.

As for the sim, if I give overcaller at least 5/4 in the majors, and 10-13 HCP or so, then this happens: 2♠ makes about 32%, 2♣ about 19%. 2♠ matchpoints at 65%, with an average IMP gain of about 1.0 non-vul, a little higher when vul.

You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.

I had a quick look at the 1354 situation. Opener has 11-13 HCP. Overcaller won’t have 5+ spades. Responder has 4-5 hearts (with 6 he’ll probably rebid them) and fewer spades than hearts. Responder passes 2C with more clubs than diamonds, otherwise responder rebids 2D.

Tweaks to any of that stuff will have little effect on results. By the way for what it is worth there is a good chance opener’s RHO will find a spade bid …

Responder at table 1 plays 2♥. Opener at table 2 plays 2m. About 70% of the heart contracts will be Moysians, 30% will be 5-3. What happens?

The 2m table wins fairly handily. It matchpoints about 55% with an average IMP gain of 0.77 nonvul, 1.10 vul. The Moysians are big losers, the 5-3 heart fits big winners, but the ratio is 70 bad to 30 good.

You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.

You asked for frequency, so I (extremely) crudely simmed the position. Opener has 5+ spades with no longer suit, and 12+ HCP. I did not constrain overcaller, but would make very little difference if I did (constraints really slowed the sims).

Big picture. Responder has a GF 12+ HCP 22% of the time, so negotiates best game.

He has less than 5 HCP 14% of the time, so passes.

Now on to hands with 5-11 HCP …

He has 3+ spades 32% of the time, so raises opener.

21% of the time he has <3 spades with no other suit longer than 5, so negotiates with opener.

Then there are hands with 6+ card suits with 5-9 HCP, each of which strain arises 3% of the time, totaling 9%

Finally, the hands you are interested in have 6+ suits with 10-11 HCP. They each come along about 1% of the time, totaling 3%.

Those should add to 100%, give or take.

So, drumroll, you will have an invitational 6+ minor some 2% of the time that opener starts 1M.

Doug Bennion

site:bridgewinners.com flannery

Doug Bennion

An observation re: sources of income. Excuse me in advance if my arithmetic is flawed. Also I round a lot. It struck me that total league membership is approximately the same number (at 160K) as total national tournament entries (annually, approximately 35K tables — 2018 lower, but hopefully an anomaly — for let's say 140K player entries).

160K members, 140K national entries. That comparability makes it easier to assess impacts of income increases. Scrambling about for an additional $1 million income? Raise membership by ~ $7 annually, OR boost table fees at nationals by about the same amount.

Doug Bennion

We'll raise partner's major to 2M with 4 trumps, and either the 15-17 balanced hand or an unbalanced hand with clubs (which usually has the dummy points of the strong notrump). Responder can sort that out if he wishes.

We've tried several variations of what to do with the 1M ‘raise’ and have settled on ‘shows unbalanced 3-fit short of reverse strength’, which seems to work well and occurs often enough. Balanced hands with 3-fit we just rebid notrump and responder can retransfer with 5.

Almost all notrump or major-fit hands are right-sided.

Doug Bennion

So. Each sample is 50K. When overcaller is 42xx and opener has a hand he would open 1♥ (constrained as described), partner has 4+ spades 42.7%. When opener’s hand is wide-open except it must have 5+ hearts (might have longer other suits), partner has 4+ spades 41.8%. And when opener’s spades are constrained, but not his minors (he might be 1507), partner has 4+ spades 43.1%. I think the arithmetic used that model.

Doug Bennion

The sim was going to take days to find a significant sample of 4810 hands, so I went with 47xx deals because OP just wants a general answer to his ‘implied fit’ question. If not, he won’t live long enough to be dealt that 8-bagger.

Overcaller’s precise minor-suit distribution is of no consequence I think. So:

When overcaller is 47xx, partner has 4+ spades 50.0%, with average spades = 3.5.

When overcaller is 45xx, partner has 4+ spades 45.3%, with average spades = 3.4

When he is 42xx, partner has 4+ spades 42.6%, with average = 3.3.

Doug Bennion

We use them in situations where we don't think we need the classic neg X showing the unbid major. For example, any sequence qualifies where three suits have been bid, partner has bid one of them, and double is a legal call. So for example here (1♣) 1♥ (1♠) ?? and here 1♣ (P) 1♥ (1♠) ?? and here (1♣) 1♥ (P) 1♠; (2♣) ?? etc.

Takes a few sessions to remember to check the position whenever the auction is competitive, and RHO bids a suit lol.

Doug Bennion

'Our 2♦ opener shows at least 1 club and a side 6-card major. We have been known to psyche the club.'

Doug Bennion

(Aside: if playing Flannery, when you open 1♥ there is an excellent chance you don’t have four spades so losing a negative double is often no big deal.)

I think also when the opening is 1M, the major benefit of the transfers is to give you an additional raise type, not to give you an unbid suit transfer.

Depending on what suits are involved, you won’t always have an unbid suit to transfer to.

1♥ (1♠) then

X = clubs (give up neg X)

1NT = natural, has positional value, often clone for neg X

2♣ = diamonds

2♦ = good heart raise

2♥ = noise

Higher = normal

However, 1♠ (2♥) then there is no unbid suit transfer

X = good raise

2♠ = noise

Higher = normal

1♠ (2♣) then

X = diamonds

2♦ = 4+ hearts

2♥ = good raise

2♠ = noise

1♥ (2♣) then

X = diamonds (how often opener have 4 spades?)

2♦ = good raise

2♥ = noise

2♠ = might be 4

If you did it here, 1♦ (2♣) then

X = good raise

2♦ = noise

2M = 4+

Note in all these sequences the transferer gets to bid again, so the transfer might just be a ‘pause’ for a strong hand. In the sequence immediately above, where X = good diamond raise, responder gets rebid opportunities to pattern-out. Auction might proceed 1♦ (2♣) X (P); 2♦ (P) 2♠; with 2♠ being 1RF at least.

And so on. I’d be interested if anybody has played this style, and the results?

Doug Bennion

(1) ‘accept’ transfer with ‘xx’ or better, otherwise rebid his own suit (which responder will pass with tolerance, or rebid his own suit, or show a second suit), or show a second suit

(2) cuebid (General strength) or jump cuebid (GF raise), or jump in partner's suit (invite), etc, lots of options

(3) rebids strongly somehow … usually not a worse ‘problem’ than if responder had bid ‘naturally’

I think you are generally not worse off than if you bid ‘normally’, and sometimes are better off. Responder can show a bad hand but nice rebiddable suit and not get into trouble because the transfer leaves responder in charge.

Doug Bennion

Doug Bennion

So although it further clouds your 1♣ openers, it sharpens your 1M (and 1♦) openers. There is a large upside during both auction and defence, to know that partner will usually have shortness somewhere (or extra length, or be 5422 if you don't consider those ‘balanced’). As others have mentioned, the implications flow through much of your system. For example after 1M 1NT, we're able to play transfer opener rebids because clubs are never ‘fake’.

Pretty sure I saw Welland Auken open 1♣ with a 5=2=4=2 hand.

Doug Bennion

Doug Bennion

When responder has 0-1 clubs (14.2%), opener has 3 clubs 1.2%, 4 = 4.4%, 5= 5.0%, 6+ = 3.6%.

When responder has 2 clubs (27.2%), opener has 3 clubs 3.8%, 4 = 10.5%, 5= 8.8%, 6+ = 4.1%.

When responder has 3 clubs (31.5%), opener has 3 clubs 6.3%, 4 = 14.0%, 5= 8.6%, 6+ = 2.6%.

When responder has 4 clubs (19.1%), opener has 3 clubs 5.5%, 4 = 9.2%, 5 = 3.8%, 6+ = 0.6%.

When responder has 5+ clubs (8.0%), opener has 3 clubs 3.4%, 4 = 3.6%, 5= 0.9%, 6+ = 0.1%.

Read as: When responder has 3 clubs (31.5% of the time), opener will have 4 clubs 14.0% (or 44.4% of the time opener has 3 clubs).

Doug Bennion

As for the sim, if I give overcaller at least 5/4 in the majors, and 10-13 HCP or so, then this happens: 2♠ makes about 32%, 2♣ about 19%. 2♠ matchpoints at 65%, with an average IMP gain of about 1.0 non-vul, a little higher when vul.

Doug Bennion

Doug Bennion

Doug Bennion

Tweaks to any of that stuff will have little effect on results. By the way for what it is worth there is a good chance opener’s RHO will find a spade bid …

Responder at table 1 plays 2♥. Opener at table 2 plays 2m. About 70% of the heart contracts will be Moysians, 30% will be 5-3. What happens?

The 2m table wins fairly handily. It matchpoints about 55% with an average IMP gain of 0.77 nonvul, 1.10 vul. The Moysians are big losers, the 5-3 heart fits big winners, but the ratio is 70 bad to 30 good.

Doug Bennion

https://www.howtogeek.com/164783/how-to-connect-mice-keyboards-and-gamepads-to-an-android-phone-or-tablet/

Doug Bennion

Big picture. Responder has a GF 12+ HCP 22% of the time, so negotiates best game.

He has less than 5 HCP 14% of the time, so passes.

Now on to hands with 5-11 HCP …

He has 3+ spades 32% of the time, so raises opener.

21% of the time he has <3 spades with no other suit longer than 5, so negotiates with opener.

Then there are hands with 6+ card suits with 5-9 HCP, each of which strain arises 3% of the time, totaling 9%

Finally, the hands you are interested in have 6+ suits with 10-11 HCP. They each come along about 1% of the time, totaling 3%.

Those should add to 100%, give or take.

So, drumroll, you will have an invitational 6+ minor some 2% of the time that opener starts 1M.

Doug Bennion