Dear Ed and Peter,

Hi. I play 1NT 12-14 and transfers over 1NT and 2NT.
Having 12 points I bid 1NT. There was an intervening of 2♣. Partner bid 2♥: I wasn't sure, but I THOUGHT that after an intervening bid transfers did not apply. We had not played before and were playing online and neither profile made comment about that, so I had to guess.
What was the most reasonable guess?
His response incidentally was to call me: 'Stupid', 'moron', 'fool', so an upsetting interchange, but, what is it best to presume?

In hope, thank you
Anthony Bedell

Reply Ed Hoogenkamp (South)

Dear Anthony,

If you don't have any specific agreements, after an intervention, every bid is natural. No 'standard' conventions. People play all kinds of conventions after an intervention (most common: Lebensohl and Rubensohl; read the answer to another question, a treatise on Rubensohl, here). But always after making agreements. Also after a double every bid is natural. Especially then: you need all bids as escapes. So every bid at the two level has to be natural.

Your partner sounds like a really nice guy by the way. I fail to see what he gains by treating his partner(s) this way. Probably his life is not going the way his wished it would go. Sad (or maybe he married the wrong woman...).

These things happen too often on free websites. I prefer sites with a membership fee. Usually that means that people behave better.
By the way, how can someone be 'stupid', a 'moron' and a 'fool' after one misunderstanding? To qualify for that, you have to be playing for at least some weeks at, let's say, Peter's level....

Un saludo desde Barcelona .

Reply Peter van der Linden (North)

Dear Anthony,

After an intervention over our 1NT opening it is commonly agreed that the usual conventions like (Puppet) Stayman and Jacoby-transfers are dropped. So your impolite (to say the least) partner is technically wrong as well (I will not elaborate too much on his social skills — he obviously hasn't got any — and Ed has been quite clear about those. Ed wrote: '...maybe he married the wrong woman...' I have one addition to make: whether your 'friendly' partner married the wrong woman I cannot say, but she certainly married the wrong man...).

Why the usual conventions are dropped? Because there is a lack of bidding space:

South cannot bid 2♣ as Stayman, and doubling 2♥ to show five spades ('I wanted to bid 2♥ as well') is ill-advised since this would mean South cannot double for penalties.

What to play instead of Stayman and Jacoby-transfers is less clear-cut. Most experienced players use one of the conventions Ed mentioned (Lebensohl and Rubensohl).

For those who keep it simple I suggest the following, to be used after any intervention at the two level (easy to memorise...):
- 2♦/♥/♠ (if possible): natural; to play; not forcing
- 2NT: natural; invitational to 3NT
- 3♣: Stayman (if the 1NT-opener doesn't have a four-card major suit, he responds 3♦ without a guard in the opponent's suit and 3NT with a guard)
- 3♦/♥/♠ natural; forcing; only bid 3♦ if you really are willing to play game (at least) in diamonds; if you are not, the cue-bid (see below) or 3NT are better options
- three in the opponent's suit (cue-bid): game forcing; asking for a guard in that suit; denying a four-card major suit
- 3NT: natural; guard in the opponent's suit

This scheme doesn't solve all problems* but most of the time it works very well. Since it is easy to remember and as natural as possible, it is highly recommended for those who want to keep it simple. (For the likes of Ed it's still too complicated. But so is opening a box of breakfast cereal, another skill Ed doesn't possess...)

* Especially the fact that it is often not possible to bid invitationally (your bid is either to play or forcing) is a weak point, but more sophisticated conventions have the same problem.

En hils fra Orkanger