[kenrexford]

♠xx ♥Kx ♦J9xxxxx ♣xx

Partner deals and opens 1♣. RHO overcalls 1♠. Passed to partner, who reopens 1NT.

What is your call?

If you opt to bid 2♦, then partner will bid 2♥.

(Does anyone play 2♦ in this sequence as a transer?)

If you assume that 2♥ is what it sounds like it is, and not that partner assumed you were playing transfers here, then what call do you make?

Whether you opt for these calls or not, what would 2♠ and what would 2NT show (by Responder)?

[pclayton]

I've never heard of transfers here but I think they are a sound idea. This auction is virtually the same as a strong club, overcall, pass showing weakness, and 1N in the balance chair. Systems on would definitely apply.

Over 1N I would bid 3♦. Pard rates to be balanced and the ♦A and a double spade stopper could be enough for 3N. 2♦ doesn't get the job done.

[gnasher]

I wouldn't want to play transfers here, because I'd like to be able to play in 2♣. The main advantage of transfers is the extra sequences they give you, but here that's unlikely to be of any benefit. I don't think that the advantage of rightsiding two of a red suit justifies the loss of a natural 2♣.

I'd bid 3♦ over 1NT.

If I bid 2♦ and partner bid 2♥, the possibilities are that he doesn't like diamonds and has hearts, or he likes diamonds and has hearts. Neither of these seems very likely, but I prefer the fit-showing meaning. Without agreement, I'd just sign off in 3♦ rather than risk disaster.

[655321]

Agree that 2♦ is quite conservative.

To me, opener has described his hand by the 1NT bid, and responder has bid 2♦ to play. Therefore 2♥ by opener does not exist.

If anyone else had posted this, I would assume an UI issue: partner alerted 2♦ and explained it as a transfer. But possibly in the World of Rexford TM the 2♥ bid does exist and means something.

[kenrexford]

655321, on Oct 19 2008, 06:21 PM, said:

Agree that 2♦ is quite conservative.

To me, opener has described his hand by the 1NT bid, and responder has bid 2♦ to play. Therefore 2♥ by opener does not exist.

If anyone else had posted this, I would assume an UI issue: partner alerted 2♦ and explained it as a transfer. But possibly in the World of Rexford TM the 2♥ bid does exist and means something.

Actually, I bid the conservative 2♦ and then had to figure out what to do now after 2♥.

[dicklont]

Not vulnerable I would bid 3♦ right away over 1♠.
Over 1 NT 2♦ is ok, but I pass 2♥, (this partner doesn't seem to know how to shut up).
When 2♥ is doubled, yak, I feel I must pass again.
Partner can hardly be disappointed with my Kx and he has one diamond at most.

[pclayton]

kenrexford, on Oct 20 2008, 04:39 AM, said:

655321, on Oct 19 2008, 06:21 PM, said:

Agree that 2♦ is quite conservative.

To me, opener has described his hand by the 1NT bid, and responder has bid 2♦ to play.  Therefore 2♥ by opener does not exist.

If anyone else had posted this, I would assume an UI issue: partner alerted 2♦ and explained it as a transfer.  But possibly in the World of Rexford TM the 2♥ bid does exist and means something. 

Actually, I bid the conservative 2♦ and then had to figure out what to do now after 2♥.

Sticky problem. Passing obviously isn't an alternative. 2♥ sounds like a safety play in the bidding.

I think pard bids 2♠ with diamond help and a spade worry by the way.

[Apollo81]

I would bid 2♦. I bet partner doesn't have too many of them, so that makes my hand bad for game. If good old partner bid 2♥ after that, I would bid 3♦ (and he better get the picture at this point).

[kenrexford]

Partner's actual hand:

♠AKx ♥AJxx ♦K10x ♣Kxx

When the stiff diamond Queen was in front of the diamond King, my call of 3♦ yielded a comment that I should obviously have bid 3NT after the super-acceptance. An immediate 3NT seems like a bit much, but I think perhaps 2♠ or 2NT by me might make sense (assuming that I comfortably was sure that 2♥ was a super-acceptance), except that I have no idea what 2NT or 2♠ shows. It seems that 2NT should be hesitant with a heart card (the unbiddable "feature") and that, therefore, 2♠ should be a hesitant call with a spade card, but partner would not have taken these bids like that.