[relknes]

Two questions.
1. Is it reasonable to use transfer responses to a Sweedish Club opening, expecting partner to complete the transfer with a weak balanced hand or refuse the transfer with the strong variety?
2. Would this be legal in ACBL land?
the response structure would look something like this:
Opener: 1♣ = 11-13 balanced or 17+ any
Responder: 1♦ = 4+ hearts
1♥ = 4+ spades
1♠ = 4+ clubs
1N = 9-11 balanced
2♣ = 4+ diamonds
If opener completes the transfer then responder, knowing that opener has 11-13 balanced, can set the final contract. If opener bids something else, showing 17+, the bidding continues on much as in a standard strong club context.

[mgoetze]

1. Sure, why wouldn't it be?
2. Not at GCC level.

[awm]

I'd be a little concerned about responder's (32)44 or 33(43) hand patterns with about 5-8 hcp. If you transfer to a minor and opener accepts on his 11-13 balanced, you may reach a kind of silly contract (i.e. a 4-2 fit in a minor) when you have about half the high card points. You'd rather play these hands in 1NT or a 4-3 major fit at the one-level.

[hrothgar]

Quote

1. Is it reasonable to use transfer responses to a Swedish Club opening, expecting partner to complete the transfer with a weak balanced hand or refuse the transfer with the strong variety?

I won't address transfers in general, however, I will comment on the specific structure that you describe

Simple, put the answer is "No"

More explictly, if I am reading your system correctly, the following hand needs to respond 2♣ to a 1♣ opening that could show a balanced 10 count.

♠ xxx
♥ xxx
♦ xxxx
♣ xxx

Quote

2. Would this be legal in ACBL land?

What clause in the GCC leads you to believe that this system is legal?

[relknes]

hrothgar, on 2011-May-31, 11:23, said:

More explictly, if I am reading your system correctly, the following hand needs to respond 2♣ to a 1♣ opening that could show a balanced 10 count.

The structure that I described has you respond 1N with 9-11 points and balanced.

hrothgar, on 2011-May-31, 11:23, said:

What clause in the GCC leads you to believe that this system is legal?

I had no idea if this was legal at midchart or not, or general chart or not, hence the question.
I should probably add the caveat that a hand which wants to play 1M opposite a balanced 11-13 should simply transfer to that major and then pass, and a hand which is undecided about playing 1N or 2M opposite an 11-13 balanced should transfer to the major and follow up with 1N. That would adress some of the more obvious flaws in the orriginal plan.
If it is not GCC or midchart legal, however, it is probably not worth developing. I have few hopes of getting something new approved for midchart, even something as vanilla as this.

[hrothgar]

Quote

The structure that I described has you respond 1N with 9-11 points and balanced.

When I referenced a balanced 10 count, I was describing your 1♣ opening, not the response.

Quote

I had no idea if this was legal at midchart or not, or general chart or not, hence the question

A more fruitful avenue of discussion might be

Here is a description of my system
I have done some basic homework
The GCC contains the following clause <<insert foo>>
I believe that this sanctions my system

[awm]

ACBL allows the following responses to 1♣ openings:

(1) Natural responses.
(2) 1♦ as an artificial forcing response.
(3) Responses which guarantee game forcing values.
(4) Jump shifts which indicate a raise.
(5) Jump responses which show 5+/4+ in two known suits.
(6) Any responses provided 1♣ is strong (15+ hcp) and forcing.

Since your 1♣ is not unambiguously strong, your 1♥/1♠/2♣ responses will not be allowed.

However, there should be no problem on the mid-chart where "all constructive responses are allowed."

[benlessard]

we are playing something like

1C--???

1D= 4H or inv pts
1H = 4S not inv
1S = no M not inv

1C-1D

1H = with at least 3H
1S = min withut 3H (4S or 3244,3253,3235_
1Nt extras

The ability to be able to play 1M in fit or partial fit is a big plus.

[Free]

The 1♠ and 2♣ responses suck, I'd rather play 1♠ as a negative or a catchall. Using transfers is not really an issue as long as you can handle the weak hands without a Major as well.

I can't respond to question 2.

[Bende]

An expert Swedish pair plays the following responses to 1♣=17+ or 11-13 balanced (any 5-card suit; sometimes (4441) or (5431)):

1♦ = 4+♥, 0+ hcp
1♥ = 4+♠, 0+ hcp
1♠ = denies 4+M, denies 5+m with 8+ hcp
1NT = 5+♣, 8+ hcp
2♣ = 5+♦,8+ hcp

[glen]

Bende, on 2011-June-01, 02:05, said:

An expert Swedish pair plays the following responses to 1♣=17+ or 11-13 balanced (any 5-card suit; sometimes (4441) or (5431)):

1♦ = 4+♥, 0+ hcp
1♥ = 4+♠, 0+ hcp
1♠ = denies 4+M, denies 5+m with 8+ hcp
1NT = 5+♣, 8+ hcp
2♣ = 5+♦,8+ hcp

and what do they bid with fewer than 8 hcp and no four card major?

[gnasher]

glen, on 2011-June-01, 02:07, said:

and what do they bid with fewer than 8 hcp and no four card major?

They bid 1♠.

[mgoetze]

glen, on 2011-June-01, 02:07, said:

and what do they bid with fewer than 8 hcp and no four card major?

I suppose that should be read "denies (5+m with 8+ hcp)".

[Bende]

mgoetze, on 2011-June-01, 02:48, said:

I suppose that should be read "denies (5+m with 8+ hcp)".

Correct.

[glen]

Bende, on 2011-June-01, 03:05, said:

Correct.

and are the 2♣ and 2♦ responses forcing and unlimited, such that 11-13 balanced opposite 8 points will end up at 2NT or higher?

[mgoetze]

glen, on 2011-June-01, 03:10, said:

and are the 2♣ and 2♦ responses forcing and unlimited, such that 11-13 balanced opposite 8 points will end up at 2NT or higher?

2♦ response wasn't mentioned. I expect with 11-13 balanced opener completes the transfer (1♣-1NT-2♣ or 1♣-2♣-2♦) and I don't see why responder would be forced to go on from there.

[gordontd]

mgoetze, on 2011-June-01, 02:48, said:

I suppose that should be read "denies (5+m with 8+ hcp)".

No need for the brackets - the comma did the job perfectly well.

[glen]

mgoetze, on 2011-June-01, 03:22, said:

2♦ response wasn't mentioned. I expect with 11-13 balanced opener completes the transfer (1♣-1NT-2♣ or 1♣-2♣-2♦) and I don't see why responder would be forced to go on from there.

You are right. I prefer the direct, non-transfer, approach, which puts the opponents in a guess:

1NT: 11+, 5+ minor
2m: 8-10, 5+ minor

Now 2m is not-forcing (11-13 will pass, 17+ will bid and establish game force), and opponents have to guess whether to enter the auction after 1♣-2♣ and 1♣-2♦. In the transfer approach, they just wait for 1♣-1NT;-2♣-Pass or 1♣-2♣;-2♦-Pass.

[relknes]

glen, on 2011-June-01, 03:57, said:

You are right. I prefer the direct, non-transfer, approach, which puts the opponents in a guess:

1NT: 11+, 5+ minor
2m: 8-10, 5+ minor

Now 2m is not-forcing (11-13 will pass, 17+ will bid and establish game force), and opponents have to guess whether to enter the auction after 1♣-2♣ and 1♣-2♦. In the transfer approach, they just wait for 1♣-1NT;-2♣-Pass or 1♣-2♣;-2♦-Pass.

I like the general idea. Would it be good to extend this principle to the majors as well? Something like...

1♦ = 4+ hearts, 0-7 or 12+
1♥ = 4+ spades, 0-7 or 12+
1♠ = 0-7, no 4+ major
1N = 12+, 5+ minor or balanced with no 4 card major
2♣ = 8-11, 5+ clubs
2♦ = 8-11, 5+ diamonds
2♥ = 8-11, 5+ hearts
2♠ = 8-11, 5+ spades

This eats up a lot of space with the 2M responses, but it is a fairly narrow bid, and as you mentioned it is GF if opener dosn't have the weak balanced variety. The preemptive value drops a bit since one opponent has already had a chance to speak, however. Is it worth putting pressure on partner like this to pressure opponents who may very well have nothing to say?

[WellSpyder]

An important objective in my mind with this sort of system is to avoid making it easy for oppo to double 1N when you get there - eg if they know you have 11-13 opposite 0-7 they can double all the time! (Presumably those using a 1♠ negative avoid this by rebidding 1N with eg 16-7 balanced as well as 11-13.)

We also prefer to be able to play in 1M with a 4-3 fit, but 1N with only a 4-2 major fit. With this in mind, my partner and I use broadly transfer responses to a Swedish-style 1♣, but with a much more Precision-like philosophy, and also with the proviso that the 11-13 balanced 1♣ opener must contain a 4-card major. In response:

1♦=negative (most 0-7, or 8-11 balanced)
1♥=5+♠, 8+pts
1♠=5+♥, 8+pts
1N=5+♣,8+pts
2♣=5+♦,8+pts
2♦=14+ balanced
2♥/♠=6 card suit, 4-6pts
2N = 12-3 balanced

As suggested by the OP, opener completes the "transfer" with 11-13 balanced, otherwise bids like a strong club (we use Precision asking bids, etc).

Over the 1♦ response, opener bids 1M with the weak balanced hand not 1N (but also bids 1M with 5M and 16-19).