[42]

Hi!
Today, at the partnership bidding table, this problem arose:
partner opened 1NT (15-17) and I looked at
♠ x
♥ KQJx
♦ AQxxxx
♣ xx

I decided to bid 2♣ and partner of course bid 2♠. 3NT? A number of ♦?
We agreed that bidding Stayman and then (with no M fit) a minor is invitational with 4M + 5m, so 3♦ could have been passed. Is that a good agreement?
Thx
Caren

[han]

When you build your bidding system over 1NT, you try to find ways to bid several kinds of weak hands, invitational hands and gameforcing hands. Sometimes you can't do everything, and you have to decide whether you want this or that strength. In those circumstances I would say that invitational hands should get lower priority than gameforcing hands.

So make sure you have a way to bid gameforcing hands like this. Invitational hands is a bonus that isn't absolutely necessary, because true invitational hands are less frequent and you'll usually do fine by upgrading them if need be.

[whereagles]

If 3♦ would be passable, I guess you more or less endplayed yourself into bidding 3NT.

Which is usually the correct contract, so no loss

[mikestar]

A possible way to retain 3m as invitational after stayman is to use minor suit transefers which are either weak or game forcing. Transfer to diamonds and then 3♥ will show this type of hand. This treatment is perfect for this hand as you have enough that there may be slam if there is a good fit in the red suits. With a minimal game force, I would prefer Stayman followed by 3NT if the heart fit doesn't exist to give less info to the opponents.

[pbleighton]

"Transfer to diamonds and then 3♥ will show this type of hand. "

Wouldn't that show 5-4, not 6-4? It's probably the best approach here, anyway.

The problem with this hand IMO is the sixth club. Very few (if any) players have a mechanism to deal with this. If you were stronger (say AKQxxx in diamonds), you could bid 4D after 2S, and hope pd understands.

Peter

[luke warm]

now a plug for my favorite method, game forcing stayman (2D).. the problem is, it isn't as effective using a strong nt as it is playing weak, but it works fine with either

[hrothgar]

check out the Scanian NT structure
extensive user of transfers during the second round of the auction

Playing Scanian, the auction would (probably) start

1N - 2♣ (Stayman)
2♦ - 3♣ (transfer to Diamonds)
3♦ - 3♠ (singleton Spade)

[kenrexford]

Although it does not help as much if the suit is clubs, I have long tried to advocate a "Minor Smolen" approach.

1NT-P-2C-P-whatever-P-?

3C = Diamonds, invitational+; 3D = Clubs

The same approach would also work after transfers.

I'm not sure that this approach is superior to anything else, but it is consistent with a Smolen approach. Thus, easier to remember.

[sceptic]

Quote

Transfer to diamonds and then 3♥ will show this type of hand. "

If you transfer to the minor (I thought this does show/ guarentee / 6 cards)?

the 3 spade bid shows no stopper I assume ? or does it show a singleton or is this up for partnership agreements or is this standardish bidding?

[Free]

Since everyone is bragging with their toys, try HEEMAN! Simply transfer ♥ followed by a 3♠ rebid showing a slam try hand with 4♥ and (5)6+♦. Heeman can show almost every hand, but it sacrifices on 'asking bids'. It's no great loss since responder can show his hand, opener will usually play and will still be 'unknown'.

[kgr]

You can find openers distribution by using minor suit stayman:
1NT-2C
2S-3C
3C = minor suit satyman, asking for openers distribution, game forcing and slem interest.
Opener bids after this sequence:
3H : 4 card C
3S : 4 card D
3NT: 4333
(same as after 2H response by opener in which case 3D would show 4432 or 4423)

[Cascade]

We have a gadget for this hand. Actually this hand is not perfect but we would still use the gadget.

1NT 3♥ shows four hearts and a stiff spade and undisclosed minor length but you must have at least one minor.

You can follow this up with 4♦ if you want depending on the NT range.

Or partner might scramble for a fit with 4m when she does not have a heart fit or a suitable spade stopper.

[FrancesHinden]

Rather than discuss favourite gadgets, let's think a bit more about basics.

When you are deciding how to respond to 1NT, you have to think about what will happen over all of partner's possible actions. If you are going to bid 2C, asking for a heart suit, you have to decide _now_ what to do opposite a 2S (or indeed 2D) response. So this is the wrong time to be giving this hand as a problem.

Instead, we should ask what the best response to a 1NT opening is. You haven't said what methods you have agreed, but there are only really two options:

i) Tell partner you have diamonds (and hearts)
ii) Look for a heart fit, then bid 3NT if you don't have one.

If you decide ii is best, then you respond 2C and bid 3NT next. But you had already decided before responding 2C.

If you decide i is best (which I think is correct), then, if you are playing minor suit transfers you transfer to diamonds and bid hearts; or you simply respond 3D (natural and game forcing) in the knowledge that partner will bid 3H with 4 hearts over that.

[luis]

People what the hell is going on?
3♦ natural and forcing!

A transfer to a minor followed by a new suit is usually used to show shortness and decide between 3NT and 5 of the minor or to start a slam investigation.

Playing 3♦ here as non-forcing doesn't make any sense at all.

Luis

[42]

Thank you, that was really helpful!
We have now decided that it makes no real sense to bid 3m as invitational and changed into GF.
(Transfer to a minor is only possible through 2♠ in our system, but then we loose a possible M-fit)
At the bidding-table I jumped after 2♠ to 4♦ (I decided before bidding Stayman ), but I didn't really feel well because much bidding space was wasted. 5♦ had chances while 3NT was definitely down.
Another question: how must a hand look like that is slam-interested? Would a 2♦ answer by opener let dreams come up?
When 3!D is already forcing: what does a jump to 4!D show? Splinter for the M?

[Limey_p]

42, on Mar 25 2006, 05:13 PM, said:

Hi!
Today, at the partnership bidding table, this problem arose:
partner opened 1NT (15-17) and I looked at
♠ x
♥ KQJx
♦ AQxxxx
♣ xx

I decided to bid 2♣ and partner of course bid 2♠. 3NT? A number of ♦?
We agreed that bidding Stayman and then (with no M fit) a minor is invitational with 4M + 5m, so 3♦ could have been passed. Is that a good agreement?
Thx
Caren

In the US, strong notrumps rule the roost. The mainstream here is as Hannie says - new suits after Stayman or transfers are game forcing, and probably slam invitational if a minor.

I'd say the options with this hand are
a. Stayman then bid diamonds (my choice, but if that's invitational, it is out).
b. Transfer to diamonds then either
i. bid 3♥, if it natural. Pard can then choose 3N without fit, otherwise show support. A new suit from opener on this type of sequence should agree responder's second suit.
ii. in bridge world standard (bws), a new suit after a minor transfer shows shortness, so here you could bid 3♠. But you're very unlikely to ever get to hearts after this start!
c. (As Luis suggests) start with 3♦ natural and forcing. Though most people here use 3D for something else, strong with both minors is common.

Andy

[Free]

42, on Mar 26 2006, 09:32 PM, said:

Thank you, that was really helpful!
We have now decided that it makes no real sense to bid 3m as invitational and changed into GF.
(Transfer to a minor is only possible through 2♠ in our system, but then we loose a possible M-fit)
At the bidding-table I jumped after 2♠ to 4♦ (I decided before bidding Stayman ), but I didn't really feel well because much bidding space was wasted. 5♦ had chances while 3NT was definitely down.
Another question: how must a hand look like that is slam-interested? Would a 2♦ answer by opener let dreams come up?
When 3!D is already forcing: what does a jump to 4!D show? Splinter for the M?

I would consider 4♦ a splinter with ♠ fit! Really aweful bid imo, unless you agreed that it's natural...

[han]

42, on Mar 26 2006, 03:32 PM, said:

(Transfer to a minor is only possible through 2♠ in our system, but then we loose a possible M-fit)

It sounds like you are playing 2S as a drop in either minor. Now that you are changing your NT structure you might want to consider throwing this out too and just pplay 4-suited transfers (assuming that you don't want to play something like Heeman, Scanian or Keri).

I also like to play that a transfer to a minor followed by a new suit shows shortness.