Sorry about last week’s missing column but sometimes the dual challenge of a lot of travel and IT connectivity- or not! - gets the better of me!This week’s column has me treading on dangerous ground as I come out fair and square against one of the most popular conventions of the modern game - transfers after a no trump opening. The use of transfers is widespread which, for me, is surprising - many pairs have adopted this convention which is pretty, but I believe inferior to the alternatives available ... and yes, I know that is a controversial position to take.The proponents of Transfers cite two main reasons - not having the opening lead coming ‘through the strong hand and, their main reason - keeping the strong hand hidden by making the no-trump opener bid the target suit first.The first reason has some, if limited , value ... for this to happen, partner has to have a suit with, say, an unsupported King, the Ace has to be behind it, and opening leader has to find the killer lead ... hmm.The second , and main reason, that of “keeping the strong hand hidden” is a puzzle to me .... in most transfer sequences we have already told the opponents that the NT opener has 15-17 points , no singleton and usually no five card major (and sometimes other information after a ‘super-accept’) and then we show them the other hand! How kind can you be? Why not show them the hand you have already told them about and keep the other hand which, although weaker, is usually unknown in strength and shape, hidden?The main reason I so dislike transfers is not what the system contains but because playing transfers stops you from playing forcing /non forcing Stayman. In this system, 2 clubs over 1 NT is Stayman but looking for a partscore or perhaps leading to an invitational sequence, whereas 2D is also Stayman but 100 percent game forcing, which takes the pressure off immediately. I believe that this is a far superior approach.Starting with the 2C response allows responder to comfortably control the bidding, even with a weak hand, often blocking out the opponents in the process . Responder can do this as partner knows that this is not a good hand.The 2D bid is the real winner, especially in the slam bidding area as the pair can go slowly, cue bidding and investigating, in the knowledge that partner will never drop the bidding below game.Here is an example which, of course, supports my case! You pick up as South A7, KQ98, AK64,743 and hear partner open 1NT. So, playing ordinary Stayman you bid 2 Clubs and partner bids 2 Spades ... now what? Simple, you Blackwood and if partner shows at least two Aces you bid 6NT - right ?You have little choice if you don’t play forcing Stayman as after 2 Spades you are afraid to bid anything short of game in case you are dropped.The result is down one! The full hands :NORTHS-KQ63H-A2D-Q987C-A83SOUTHS-A7H-KQ98D-AK64C-743Playing forcing Stayman makes the hand a lot to deal with as once you bid 2D after 1NT you are both committed to game …so the bidding would proceed :NORTH SOUTH1NT(1) 2D(2)2S 2NT(3)3D (4) 4NT(5)5S(6) 6D(1) 15-17(2) game-forcing Stayman(3) tell me more(4) 4 diamonds(5) RKC Blackwood(6) 2 Key Cards and the trump queenOnce the major suits don’t cooperate the No Trump Slam is doomed … the diamond slam however is cold … 3 spades, three hearts, four diamonds, one club and a club ruff in dummy, the other club going on the spade.I would suggest you and your partner take a good look at Forcing Stayman - but don’t stop playing transfers, otherwise you will never get a game with a new partner as everyone plays them!