Join Bridge Winners
Is there an "Expert Standard" Transfer Lebensohl?

Scouring the internet for information about Transfer Lebensohl, one fact stands out: agreeing to play this convention with a partner of similar standard to my own without further discussion is a recipe for unmitigated disaster. What I'm interested in here is whether an expert (I'm thinking of someone like Gavin Wolpert) would face the same problem, or whether there is a consensus best answer to the questions I'm about to pose.

Here are a some things I'm going to postulate:

  1. We're playing a strong 1NT opening (14-16 or 15-17).
  2. Our doubles of their (natural) overcalls are for takeout.
  3. Our 1NT-(2)-2NT is ambiguous as to the suit shown (the method where 2NT always shows clubs I would call Rubensohl rather than Transfer Lebensohl).
  4. Our two ways to bid 3NT distinguish whether we have a stopper in the opponents' suit, i.e. 1NT-(2)-3NT denies a spade stopper, 1NT-(2)-2NT; 3-3NT shows one.


With all that out of the way, there are still, in my mind, 3 points that need to be addressed.

I. Transfer into or transfer through

Let's say it goes 1NT-(2), with the opponents having shown 5+ hearts. It's rather unlikely that we want to play hearts ourselves, so bidding their suit can have a special meaning. But how do you bid their suit? Is 3 now a "transfer to hearts" with special meaning, with 3 showing spades (we'll call this method "transfer into"), or does 3 transfer to spades with the 3 cuebid having the special meaning (we'll call this method "transfer through")?

Each of these methods creates an extra bid, but in a different area. What is the meaning of 1NT-(2)-3; 3?

II. Use of cuebids

If they've shown one suit, we have two ways to bid it, for instance with "transfer into" we have both 1NT-(2)-3 and 1NT-(2)-2NT; 3-3. What do these show? A rather obvious idea is "Stayman with/without a stopper" but then we need to clarify when we use this route and when we double. Another idea I have seen is that one of them asks for a stopper, presumably with a running minor (the difference to showing the minor being that partner's fit for the minor is immaterial, and the difference to a "fast 3NT" being that we know where we are going if partner doesn't have a stopper). Or we can show a 5-5 hand; with a major we'll probably just transfer to the major and then bid the minor, but 5-5 minors is not an easy hand to show otherwise (given that we want to keep 3NT in play).

III. Bidding clubs

1NT-(2)-3 shows clubs, but obviously this bid needs to be game-forcing. We could also have a weak sign-off in clubs, or we could have an invitational hand with clubs, and we can only fit one of these into 2NT - which one do we choose? (Note: if 2NT can be invitational with clubs, then opener bids 3 to reject or 3 to accept.)


I look forward to your comments on which answers you consider best and whether you consider it safe to assume those answers with an expert partner.

Getting Comments... loading...

Bottom Home Top