[kgr]

Hello,

What do you consider the best - and not too complex - defence against T-Walsh?
1♣-(p)-1♦-? (1♦ transfer to ♥)
1♣-(p)-1♥-? (1♥ transfer to ♠)

thanks,
Koen

[helene_t]

dbl shows the suit bid
cue is take-out
1NT can be natural if you play against juniors, lol

[the hog]

This is what we play, though to be honest, there have been times when you want to bid the suit naturally.

[pclayton]

In my limited experience I've suggested 1x of their suit as natural and double as takeout of their suit. Perhaps theres a better method.

[mikeh]

we suggest, when playing this: double shows the suit doubled, but less than the values to bid it... bid of the suit shown is takeout... bid of 2 of the suit shown is natural...nt is natural... don't yet know how effective this is since we have only played about 20 sessions so far and the frequencies of these issues is relatively low.

BTW, a more difficult scenario is over the 1♣ 1♠ response, which we play as denying a major, unless gf with longer ♦s, or a notrump response out of range for 1N, which is 8-10... thus 5-7 or 11-12.

Now I think you just play double as takeout of ♣s, with emphasis on the majors.

[DJNeill]

Is T-Walsh GCC in the ACBL, or mid-chart?

Dan

[pclayton]

DJNeill, on Jan 23 2007, 04:22 PM, said:

Is T-Walsh GCC in the ACBL, or mid-chart?

Dan

Midchart.

[paulg]

We play T-Walsh and use the following defence when the opps play it against us:

double is takeout of their suits
cue is natural
jump cue (2M) is more natural
1NT is 15-18 balanced
2♣ is natural

Over 1♠ showing diamonds we play that 2♦ shows the majors.

p

[whereagles]

The usual way to defend transfer bids is indeed

dbl = suit bid
cue = take-out

but I think it might be better something like

dbl = take-out of the suit shown (not the suit bid)
cue = michaels style cue

albeit this makes more sense at the 1-level or when the transfer is a preempt. After strong auctions like 1NT 2♦ (xfer), the usual defense is preferable.

[FrancesHinden]

You have been given one extra call: the 1-level cuebid of the suit they are transferring into. You can make various uses of it.

I play

Dbl = a 1-level overcall in the suit doubled (or a strong hand with the suit doubled).
1-level cue = take-out of the suit shown
2-level of the suit doubled = intermediate jump overcall strength
2-level of the suit shown = natural, just like 1C P 1H 2H
1NT = natural
2C = Michaels

(the additional "use" I make is showing values in the suit doubled)

The other common approaches are
Dbl = take-out of the suit shown

1-level cue = Natural or
1-level cue = Michaels style

After 1C P 1S showing random values without a major, I play double as spades, 2C as major-suit take-out.

[SoTired]

The definition I saw said that 1S response shows 5+♦, Walsh hand (no 4M if less than GF).

[JanM]

Vs. 1♣-1R showing the next higher suit, the defense that IMHO is least likely to lead to accidents is DBL shows the suit bid, cue of suit shown is a 3 suit takeout of that suit and everything else is as if they had bid the suit shown. That's what we recommend to opponents (my preferred structure is at least something like T-Walsh, although I suspect that T-Walsh is in a STR NT structure, whereas ours is in a WK NT structure, so 1♣ promises either clubs or a STR NT+ balanced hand). When I'm asked to recommend a defense, I always give people the defense that I think is least likely to cause accidents.

What we use, although it's a little more accident-prone, is DBL is a 3-suit takeout of the suit shown, cue of the suit shown is Michaels, and everything else is as if they'd bid the suit shown, (2 of the suit they bid is natural if it wouldn't otherwise be). We used to play that the cue bid was natural, but found having a low-level Michaels bid was more useful.

1♣-1♠ is more difficult. Some people play that 1♠ promises diamonds, others (including me) just use it to deny a 4 card Major and also to deny some other hands (whatever you would respond 1NT with, as well as what you'd bid at the 2-level with, probably strong hands with clubs, weak hands with diamonds, strong or weak or perhaps fit-showing with a Major). Because showing spades is so useful, we use DBL of the 1♠ response to show spades, a hand we'd have overcalled 1♠ on if the opponents hadn't bid it first. You can then use 2♣ and 2♦ as takeout bids of some sort (what probably depends on the meaning of 1♠). 2♥ and 2♠ are natural, with 2♠ being either stronger or more shapely than 1♠.

I think that this is an area where there isn't a huge theoretical advantage to one thing over another, so it's definitely right to play what feels comfortable to you and your partner.