[1eyedjack]

 aguahombre, on 2014-February-22, 16:08, said:

Yes, I guess I have. She invites with an invite, and it isn't a burden unless she doesn't have one.

What you say has an element of truth. If her system forces her to make a stark choice between passing or inviting (or bidding game) opposite a hand with wide range of playing values, then she may not consider herself particularly emburdened. Just follow some rules, take an average minus, and move on.

[Vampyr]

 aguahombre, on 2014-February-22, 14:11, said:

Meanwhile, the hand which is going to be declarer isn't giving free leakage for the times when it is unhelpful to responder.

There need be no leakage. I believe that there should be just one bid used for all super accepts.

[aguahombre]

 Vampyr, on 2014-February-22, 20:14, said:

There need be no leakage. I believe that there should be just one bid used for all super accepts.

Yes, but that wasn't what one-eye was advocating. He was talking about different superaccepts, showing different things.

[1eyedjack]

 aguahombre, on 2014-February-22, 21:01, said:

Yes, but that wasn't what one-eye was advocating. He was talking about different superaccepts, showing different things.

Eh? I didn’t address that issue at all.

[Vampyr]

 aguahombre, on 2014-February-22, 21:01, said:

Yes, but that wasn't what one-eye was advocating. He was talking about different superaccepts, showing different things.

I mentioned leakage because you did.

[1eyedjack]

My original post contested (or attempted to) only the OP assertion, which seems to have some support in this thread, that all transfers should be accepted.

On the subject of leakage, I spend most of my time playing with GIB, whose system does dictate leaking opener’s doubleton when superaccepting. This is a point where I generally psych by showing a doubleton in a 4 card side suit. It doesn’t seem to affect (as far as I can tell) whether CHO bids game. The intention is to put the defence off the scent. It might also inhibit a sac, although I have never known GIB to enter the auction late having previously passed. That said, I would find it hard to produce evidence that this psych creates misdefences. Jury still out on that one.

[Cthulhu D]

 kuhchung, on 2014-February-21, 14:33, said:

Wait, agree with what?

Also, 2D transfer vs 2H natural doesn't exactly shut out 2S.

I also really have no stake in this thread. I just posted that one initial reply because I thought it was funny and now I'm here discussing this argh

Posting in 32519's threads loses 100% of the time, wins 0% of the time.

Seriously that was the greatest quote.

[PrecisionL]

I would NOT super accept, there is no side weak doubleton for an extra trick playing in hearts.

In fact, I would not open this hand 1NT, it has too many quacks and not enought As & Ks.

[mycroft]

 kuhchung, on 2014-February-21, 14:33, said:

Wait, agree with what?

...

Quote

I just posted that one initial reply because I thought it was funny...

Yep, and that's what I agree with. Sorry to "pull you back in".

[RunemPard]

My $2.02...

Isn't a 0-4 HCP hand pretty rare opposite a 1NT opening where all others are passing? The more passes before the 1NT opening, the higher the odds of partner having some values. The purpose of a super-accept is to find decent games on shapely hands that fit well with fewer HCP. 5-8 points is pretty common, so if the shape/value placement are good this is what they are for. You also get a preemptive effect that may very well get you a great board at any scoring. Of course you will run into completely worthless hands that either lack values, shape, or good fit, but I have had far more good results from super-accepting than bad results.

The point...every bid/system will fail on some hands. But if you are winning on a greater % and actually judging the hands properly you will gain big. Also, the better you are at declaring, the better your overall results will be. If you have bad judgment and bad declarer play, then definitely remove most bids like this that involve understanding a hands true value.

And honestly...would you really stay out of game with these 2 hands? Even if you bid it as most would the bidding most likely goes...

1N-2D
2H-3N

or

1N-2D
2H-2N
3H/4H/3N-I can not see this player ever passing 3H with their hand.

or

1N-2D
2H-3C
now you are already forced to game...


I couldn't really imagine bidding less than game with the responding hand.