[Shugart23]

I’m just curious. Bidding went 1Nt them -2d partner (announced hearts))-2s them-3d me meaning ‘partner, bid 3h—4s them. At the table When I bid 3D, does my partner announce ‘ hearts’. Or does he alert the bid and if asked say it’s a relay to hearts. Is my 3d bid a relay or a transfer?

[mw64ahw]

I'd alert and indicate Hearts if asked. I assume it's a transfer with some values.

[Shugart23]

Yes. But is it a transfer. Or a relay. Just a technical question on the definition ( not that it matters)

[Huibertus]

Shugart23, on 2026-January-11, 14:40, said:

I’m just curious. Bidding went 1Nt them -2d partner (announced hearts))-2s them-3d me meaning ‘partner, bid 3h—4s them. At the table When I bid 3D, does my partner announce ‘ hearts’. Or does he alert the bid and if asked say it’s a relay to hearts. Is my 3d bid a relay or a transfer?

It's called re-transfer, because the transfer was not completed yet. Same as (uninterrupted) 1NT-2♦-3♣-3♦ for instance. It's alertable of course. And if asked he answers "re-transfer". Opponents are assumed to understand this means ♥ and not some other suit, you don't have to school them.

Relay is a word used for bidding sequences where the OTHER hand is going to respond to identify one of multiple hand types. So in this case if this is a relay the 1NT opening can have several hand types,which makes no sense.

If alternatively the 3♦ bidder bids in order to show one of multiple hand types this is called a puppet, after which the mandatory 3♥ response is the relay and the next bid by the 3♦ bidder will identify which hand type he holds.

[shugart24]

Huibertus, on 2026-January-12, 04:34, said:

It's called re-transfer, because the transfer was not completed yet. Same as (uninterrupted) 1NT-2♦-3♣-3♦ for instance. It's alertable of course. And if asked he answers "re-transfer". Opponents are assumed to understand this means ♥ and not some other suit, you don't have to school them.

Relay is a word used for bidding sequences where the OTHER hand is going to respond to identify one of multiple hand types. So in this case if this is a relay the 1NT opening can have several hand types,which makes no sense.

If alternatively the 3♦ bidder bids in order to show one of multiple hand types this is called a puppet, after which the mandatory 3♥ response is the relay and the next bid by the 3♦ bidder will identify which hand type he holds.

Thanks. I have never heard the term - re-transfer. so in the case of Hello defense where 1NT them -2C us, and the 2C bid is either a long Diamond suit OR 55 in a undisclosed Major -minor, you would say that the 2C bid is a puppet, the 2D bid is a relay. And what is a 'waiting bid ' ? is a waiting bid the same as a puppet ?

or as another example, we play 1NT us -2NT -us requests partner to bid 3C upon which I will pass or correct to 3D. You would say the 2NT is a puppet and the 3C bid is a relay I gather

I guess the actual names of the terms doesn't matter; I was just curious

[mw64ahw]

shugart24, on 2026-January-12, 05:36, said:

Thanks. I have never heard the term - re-transfer. so in the case of Hello defense where 1NT them -2C us, and the 2C bid is either a long Diamond suit OR 55 in a undisclosed Major -minor, you would say that the 2C bid is a puppet, the 2D bid is a relay. And what is a 'waiting bid ' ? is a waiting bid the same as a puppet ?

or as another example, we play 1NT us -2NT -us requests partner to bid 3C upon which I will pass or correct to 3D. You would say the 2NT is a puppet and the 3C bid is a relay I gather

I guess the actual names of the terms doesn't matter; I was just curious

You can also throw in the term 'marionette'. In the 'hello' example where 2N 'puppets' to 3♣ it becomes a 'marionette' if you use say 3♦ as a forcing bid.

[barmar]

You don't have to use any specific wording for this. Just alert it, and explain in any reasonable way that you're asking partner to bid hearts again.

ACBL only proscribes the language for announcements, not alert explanations. Explanations are not supposed to use terse convention names (the opponent might not be familiar with the name, or have a different understanding of it than you do), you should describe the meaning in detail.

And while the official definition of "relay" is as Huibertus explained, many players casually use it for puppets and marrionettes. For instance, many people describe the Lebensohl 2NT bid as a "relay to 3♣". I can't recall anyone ever using the word "marionette" at the table.

[Shugart23]

Yeah. I was just curious on the terms. Learned a new one too !

[pescetom]

Huibertus, on 2026-January-12, 04:34, said:

It's called re-transfer, because the transfer was not completed yet. Same as (uninterrupted) 1NT-2♦-3♣-3♦ for instance. It's alertable of course. And if asked he answers "re-transfer". Opponents are assumed to understand this means ♥ and not some other suit, you don't have to school them.

Relay is a word used for bidding sequences where the OTHER hand is going to respond to identify one of multiple hand types. So in this case if this is a relay the 1NT opening can have several hand types,which makes no sense.

If alternatively the 3♦ bidder bids in order to show one of multiple hand types this is called a puppet, after which the mandatory 3♥ response is the relay and the next bid by the 3♦ bidder will identify which hand type he holds.

It is not (IMO) a re-transfer. Re-transfer is the same player repeating his transfer which partner was unable or unwilling to complete.

Relay is so amiguous and abused that it is best to avoid as much as possible, but I would define it as an artificial bid (often the cheapest available) that requests partner to bid one of a sequence of bids. This it not a relay.

What it is depends upon what your agreement actually is, IOW how does 3♦ differ from 3♥ here?
In any case I would expect your regulations (or the spirit of disclosure) to demand an alert for 3♦ if not natural, the "transfer" boat already sailed

[blackshoe]

You might look at The Bridge World Dictionary.

[shugart24]

pescetom, on 2026-January-12, 16:10, said:

It is not (IMO) a re-transfer. Re-transfer is the same player repeating his transfer which partner was unable or unwilling to complete.

Relay is so amiguous and abused that it is best to avoid as much as possible, but I would define it as an artificial bid (often the cheapest available) that requests partner to bid one of a sequence of bids. This it not a relay.

What it is depends upon what your agreement actually is, IOW how does 3♦ differ from 3♥ here?
In any case I would expect your regulations (or the spirit of disclosure) to demand an alert for 3♦ if not natural, the "transfer" boat already sailed

Our agreement, with one exception is : If the opponents make any immediate bid while remaining at the 2 level over partner's bid, transfer lebensohl (TL) is on. It doesn't matter who opened - them or us -. so, 1NT them -2D (hearts) us -3C them ....the 3C bid is immediate but not at the 2 level, so TL is not on. 3H bid would be just completing the transfer

1S us, 2D them....TL is on

1D us -1S thme -double me -2S them...TL is on

1S them 2C us -pass -pass -2S them...TL is not on

2H us - double them...TL is on




1

[pescetom]

 shugart24, on 2026-January-13, 04:50, said:

Our agreement, with one exception is : If the opponents make any immediate bid while remaining at the 2 level over partner's bid, transfer lebensohl (TL) is on. It doesn't matter who opened - them or us -. so, 1NT them -2D (hearts) us -3C them ....the 3C bid is immediate but not at the 2 level, so TL is not on. 3H bid would be just completing the transfer

1S us, 2D them....TL is on

1D us -1S thme -double me -2S them...TL is on

1S them 2C us -pass -pass -2S them...TL is not on

2H us - double them...TL is on

Thanks. So IIUC 3D is an inv+ transfer to hearts, 3H would be transfer to their suit meaning Stayman, 2NT would be a Puppet to 3C over which you can sign off in 3H.
Technically it's a transfer, but the opponents deserve to know that it is also a game invite and that simple completion of the transfer is discouraging. I would hope you can alert it, you certainly should do over here.

[Shugart23]

Yes we alert and give as full explanation as we can. No sure what you mean by IIUC. We have fast and slow bids into their suit, both of which are Stsyman with values strong enough to be at least at 3Nt . Fast denies a stop and slow shows. Eg. 1s us 2h them-3d(fast) showing 4 spades, no heart stop vs 1s us -2h them 2Nt us -3c us-3h -us. Showing the stop and soades. Once you get used to it, it works really welll with a good use of a marionette

[pescetom]

Shugart23, on 2026-January-13, 11:27, said:

Yes we alert and give as full explanation as we can. No sure what you mean by IIUC. We have fast and slow bids into their suit, both of which are Stsyman with values strong enough to be at least at 3Nt . Fast denies a stop and slow shows. Eg. 1s us 2h them-3d(fast) showing 4 spades, no heart stop vs 1s us -2h them 2Nt us -3c us-3h -us. Showing the stop and soades. Once you get used to it, it works really welll with a good use of a marionette

The convention looks sound (maybe a bit too aggressive over 1NT at unfavourable), glad you can and do alert.
IIUC = "if I understand correctly", not sure if is standard but I have to say it often
In Italian, SHCB ("se ho capito bene").

[barmar]

pescetom, on 2026-January-12, 16:10, said:

It is not (IMO) a re-transfer. Re-transfer is the same player repeating his transfer which partner was unable or unwilling to complete.

Isn't that what's going on here? Opener was unable to complete the transfer because an opponent interfered. So responder repeated their transfer.

[pescetom]

 barmar, on 2026-January-13, 14:48, said:

Isn't that what's going on here? Opener was unable to complete the transfer because an opponent interfered. So responder repeated their transfer.

Not as I read it.
Interferer bid a transfer, Responder made another bid and now Advancer (no longer able to complete the transfer at level) made the same transfer.
It's not the same player repeating his transfer, nor is it his partner repeating the transfer to sign off after already implicitly accepting the proposed trumps suit with some other bid.
But ultimately a question of semantics, agreed.
The important thing is that opponents understand the non-obvious agreement behind the second transfer here.

[Shugart23]

 pescetom, on 2026-January-13, 13:33, said:

The convention looks sound (maybe a bit too aggressive over 1NT at unfavourable), glad you can and do alert.
IIUC = "if I understand correctly", not sure if is standard but I have to say it often
In Italian, SHCB ("se ho capito bene").

The exception is if you opens 1c (strong). We don’t want partner to become the captain. So TL is not in for partner but is on for the strong club bifdder. So 1C us -2h them -2Nt partner is not a relay.

[jillybean]

barmar, on 2026-January-12, 14:29, said:

You don't have to use any specific wording for this. Just alert it, and explain in any reasonable way that you're asking partner to bid hearts again.

ACBL only proscribes the language for announcements, not alert explanations. Explanations are not supposed to use terse convention names (the opponent might not be familiar with the name, or have a different understanding of it than you do), you should describe the meaning in detail.

And while the official definition of "relay" is as Huibertus explained, many players casually use it for puppets and marrionettes. For instance, many people describe the Lebensohl 2NT bid as a "relay to 3♣". I can't recall anyone ever using the word "marionette" at the table.

Terse convention names, relay, puppet, are standard, explanations are rare.
More often than not when I start to provide an explanation I am interrupted with "oh, convention name"

From the other site, I think this this is a good explanation of relay, puppet etc

[pescetom]

 jillybean, on 2026-January-14, 07:39, said:

Terse convention names, relay, puppet, are standard, explanations are rare.
More often than not when I start to provide an explanation I am interrupted with "oh, convention name"

From the other site, I think this this is a good explanation of relay, puppet etc

As the article suggests, wikipedia is precise and ACBL is wonky. In general, wikipedia is becoming a good resource for bridge information. Just hope it stays free of AI generated "knowledge".

I too am often interrupted with "oh, <name>". Then they call the Director later because I don't play it the way they imagined.
Or they attempt to correct my clear explanation because it's not the way they play the convention: "she has no five card major.", "but has one or both four card majors", "no, it says nothing about four card majors, you will have to figure those out yourselves." (but your partner is already on the right road, thanks to your urgent need to know).