[jdonn]

Jlall, on May 5 2010, 12:42 PM, said:

mikeh, on May 5 2010, 10:48 AM, said:

For those who argue: if 2♥ is a transfer, we find hearts via 2♦, let me ask you what partner is supposed to bid over 2♣ when he wants to compete in diamonds.

Yeah and how do you play 2D after 1N p ? if you play transfers. Obviously transfers suck!

I understand theres more likelihood that you should play in 2D when the auction goes this way, and less need to transfer and bid again, but you are still in bad shape when you have an invitational hand and you don't play transfers. Personally I'd like to be able to transfer to a major and bid 2N more than I'd like to have the ability to play 2D (and this is always the argument for transfers).

Meckstroth argues this is an extremely important auction for invitations because the range of 1NT is like 5 points wide. So that backs up what you are saying, although on the flip side most invitations with a 5 card major would have overcalled. So eh, who knows?

[Lobowolf]

helene_t, on May 5 2010, 07:15 AM, said:

OK, I probably underestimated the complexity of this problem. The true probabilities may be:
10% game try, ostensibly with four spades.
10% spades-diamond 5-5
10% transfer
10% spades-diamonds 4-6 (4-5?)
10% Natural
10% Random psyche
10% Blame transfer
10% Misclick
10% Ken Rexford
10% Other

Post of the Year nominee.

[Fluffy]

if it can be natural.... however pass is a logical alternative to competing in hearts whatever you have IMO, so I don't feel te need to have the bid avaible.