[Vampyr]

mikeh, on 2011-October-03, 14:28, said:

I certainly wouldn't use it on 'any doubleton'.....I don't see how that information is going to be of much use to responder much of the time, and clearly it will help the defence count out the hand if opener declares

In my regular partnership we used to be even more helpful to the defense -- we showed worthless doubletons and Hx until we realised that one superaccept is the way to go.

[the hog]

ggwhiz, on 2011-October-03, 13:10, said:

Shortsighted I think. When I fail to super accept my pard plays me for a doubleton or a worm, possibly both.

They are much better placed with a more nimble positive response to be the Captain. If we lose a few partscore swings but gain even a very few game swings when responder is in the good 7 pt range, we are "winning" (Charlie Sheen).

This is a nonsense comment. Well maybe not....YOUR partner may play YOU for this, but anyone playing bridge to win will not.

[ggwhiz]

the hog, on 2011-October-03, 18:07, said:

This is a nonsense comment. Well maybe not....YOUR partner may play YOU for this, but anyone playing bridge to win will not.

So you open 1nt, pard bids 2♦ and you bid 2♥ on almost everything and blame pard if they guess wrong on marginal invites. That's winning bridge? Sure ain't partnership bridge.

[cloa513]

jmcw, on 2011-October-01, 18:42, said:

---

3♦ showed a max with dub ♦, 3♥ was a retransfer, whats your last call pass or 4♠?. Soft defence allowed 4♠ to make.

Some discussion afterward leads me to believe I need better methods for super accepts! any suggestions?

It seems noone has mentioned your real problem. The 1NT is too strong to open 15-17- its worth 18 with the good 5 card hearts suit and other good qualities.

[aguahombre]

cloa513, on 2011-October-03, 21:24, said:

It seems noone has mentioned your real problem. The 1NT is too strong to open 15-17- its worth 18 with the good 5 card hearts suit and other good qualities.

Or not. KNR disagrees with you and rates it as 16.5 at the start. And it has been mentioned earlier by someone who also believes it is worth 18.

I don't know, but it looks like a 1nt opener to me.

[the hog]

ggwhiz, on 2011-October-03, 21:19, said:

So you open 1nt, pard bids 2♦ and you bid 2♥ on almost everything and blame pard if they guess wrong on marginal invites. That's winning bridge? Sure ain't partnership bridge.

Depends what is a "marginal invite" for you, doesn't it?

[jmcw]

cloa513, on 2011-October-03, 21:24, said:

It seems noone has mentioned your real problem. The 1NT is too strong to open 15-17- its worth 18 with the good 5 card hearts suit and other good qualities.

We do our math differently. As some have mentioned its a good 1NT maybe not even a max.

KQJ
KQJT9
32
AT9

This is a max to me and I would have no qualms about super accepting ♠.

[gnasher]

mikeh, on 2011-October-03, 14:28, said:

In fairness, I have been playing this only in my current partnership, and it has come up rarely. So far, the results have been neutral, neither winning nor losing. However, the approach was, I think, played by Soloway at least in some of his partnerships, and he was a decent player, as I recall.

Hamman-Soloway also played Flannery, 3041-Keycard and Gerber. I suspect that if we looked through the system file of any world-class partnership we'd find at least one method that many people would consider poor.

[mike777]

fwiw this is the style of superaccept I play:


4 card support.
3 of our major =4card support, minimum, no useful doubleton.
2nt=4 card support non-minimum no useful doubleton.

otherwise I show useful doubleton( Ax, kx, OR XX, NOTE YOU CAN COUNT Jx, AJ or KJ if not a minimum in high cards).

[fromageGB]

I don't like the idea of opener giving information to the defence when most times responder is already decided whether he is bidding game or not. I prefer a non-descriptive trial bid.

For me a superacceptance is any hand that has 4 card support. Rather than give information to the opponents unnecessarily, use 2M+1 in response to the transfer. Then responder can

• sign off in 3M
  
• bid 4M
  
• >3M = serious cue bid
  
• <3M = invite, showing ideally a valueless short suit such as xx (1NT 2♦ 2♠ 2NT = spades). Opener decides, and can decline game with wasted soft values here.

Admitedly a declined invitation gives information to help the defence, but any meaningful game exploration has to.

[whereagles]

What's the problem of giving lead info on a weak doubleton? If responder has a problem with that, he can bid the transfer suit himself instead of retransferring.

[fromageGB]

whereagles, on 2011-October-04, 10:05, said:

What's the problem of giving lead info on a weak doubleton? If responder has a problem with that, he can bid the transfer suit himself instead of retransferring.

Funny, I hadn't thought of that !
Yes, thanks. This gets the wrong hand exposed, but you can't have everything.

[gnasher]

whereagles, on 2011-October-04, 10:05, said:

What's the problem of giving lead info on a weak doubleton? If responder has a problem with that, he can bid the transfer suit himself instead of retransferring.

So we give them two suits to lead instead of one?

[whereagles]

Been seeing too many horror movies, I guess. So you lead one of those suits and dummy has AKx AKx. Oh well...

[Free]

The main point of super accepts is to find a light game when responder wouldn't invite on his own. Otherwise partner will continue to bid anyway and opener can compensate for any extra values or extra trumps. For this particular reason, I prefer to super accept only with a 4 card support and a maximum. I don't have anything against minimum hands, but the chance of finding a makeable game are in my experience far less.

Then there's another discussion: how to super accept? There are many calls available, so many play that opener describes his hand with various calls (like you do). However opener could also just ask and let responder describe (super accept with step 1, example 1NT-2♥-2NT-... - now responder has space to show a singleton/void below 3M). This is the method I prefer, because it's more useful for opener to know responder's shortness, than responder knowing anything more specific than he already knows about opener's hand and in the meantime giving away more info to the defense.

[fromageGB]

Free, on 2011-October-06, 05:20, said:

...However opener could also just ask and let responder describe (super accept with step 1, example 1NT-2♥-2NT-... - now responder has space to show a singleton/void below 3M). This is the method I prefer, because it's more useful for opener to know responder's shortness, than responder knowing anything more specific than he already knows about opener's hand and in the meantime giving away more info to the defense.

I agree with you, but there is a problem in that only 2 responder bids are available to show a shortage in any of 3 suits, if you still want the ability to transfer to 3M with a weak hand. You could play something like this after (eg) 1NT 2♥ 2NT :
4♥(retransfer) = OK, game
3♥(retransfer) = weak, no game
3♦ = uncertain, short in diamonds
..then opener bids
.. 3♠ = that's no good
.. 4♠ = that's OK
3♣ = uncertain, shortage in clubs or hearts
..then opener bids
.. 4♠ = I'm happy for both
.. 3♠ = I'm happy if it is hearts, but not clubs
....then responder
.... pass = short in clubs
.... 4♥(transfer) = short in hearts
.. 3♦ = I'm happy if it is clubs, but not hearts
....then responder
.... 3♥(transfer) = it is hearts
.... 4♥(transfer) = OK, it's clubs

but this seems complicated to remember and has great potential for going wrong.
The alternative seems to be
4♥(retransfer) = OK, game
3♣= uncertain, short in clubs
3♦ = uncertain, short in diamonds
3♥ = uncertain, short in hearts
3♠ = weak, no game

but the trouble is when responder is weak there is even more need to have opener play the hand.

Free, how do you handle this?

[Zelandakh]

Free, on 2011-October-06, 05:20, said:

The main point of super accepts is to find a light game when responder wouldn't invite on his own.

Spoken like a true strong NoTrumper! Over in weak NT land, one of the key reasons for super-accepting is to win the part-score battle. Thus I advocate super-accepting with 4 trumps and a ruffing feature but not 4333. I agree that it is far better to super-accept with a super-charged hand and 3 card support than a weak hand and 4333 with 4 card support if you are keen to play at the 3 level on more hands.

[Trinidad]

fromageGB, on 2011-October-06, 06:02, said:

The alternative seems to be
4♥(retransfer) = OK, game
3♣= uncertain, short in clubs
3♦ = uncertain, short in diamonds
3♥ = uncertain, short in hearts
3♠ = weak, no game

but the trouble is when responder is weak there is even more need to have opener play the hand.

Free, how do you handle this?

You could make a small change:
4♥(retransfer) = OK, game
3♣= uncertain, short in clubs
3♦ = uncertain, short in diamonds
3♥ (retransfer) = to play 3♠ or to continue cueing or bidding game
3♠ = uncertain, short in hearts

Now responder doesn't get to play the hand when he is weak, but when he has invitational values.

Rik

[aguahombre]

Zelandakh, on 2011-October-06, 06:33, said:

Spoken like a true strong NoTrumper! Over in weak NT land, one of the key reasons for super-accepting is to win the part-score battle.

Free spoke like a true strong NoTrumper in a thread base on a strong NoTrump opening. How odd!

[neilkaz]

Nice thread here. Like some others I prefer to superaccept with 2NT rather than bidding a small doubleton.

Anyhow, re the OP hand: What do those of you who open 1♥ bid over PD's common 1♠ with this hand and assuming that a 2♣ response is NF?

.. neilkaz ..