[steve2005]

I've been thinking about changing use for 1NT-3m.
Currently 3♣/3♦ showing a good 6 card minor INV (to 3NT)but with nothing outside.
My replacement i've been suggesting is a (31)(54) 5-4 in minors(5 of bid minor)forcing to 3NT or 4 of a minor, so about 10 pts in strength which I call near game force or NGF.
Currently use 2♠ as one of:
a)sign-off in a minor
b)sign-off with both minors
c)(31)(54)with NGF

The idea being 2♠ should be weak and the NGF gets its own bid. This would be similar to the 3♥/3♠ as a singleton and 5-4 in minors

Does this NGF hand deserve its own bids?

[rogerclee]

This structure is extremely popular among people I know:

2S: clubs (bid 3C if you like it)
2N: diamonds or weak minors (bid 3D if you like it)
3C: puppet stayman
3D: 5+/5+ minors, GF (3H asks shortness)
3H: 31(54) GF
3S: 13(54) GF

This structure addresses many of your concerns. Signoff, invite, and GF with the minor are all handled by this structure (transfer to a minor then new suit = shortness and GF values). Signoff with both minors can transfer to diamonds and pass whatever partner bids (it's not perfect, but it works fine). 31(54) and less than GF values is a problem, though my experience suggests that it is not worth losing sleep over being able to show this exactly. Between upgrading it to a game force, calling it an invitational hand, and just passing 1N, you can usually just pick one.

[aguahombre]

I voted "yes", even though we don't use 3m in that manner; and haven't since the early 80's.

It is not bad. But, better uses for certain sequences have emerged. Methods which, for instance, work it out so partner can be the declarer in 3m with those hands are better.

[bluecalm]

What about invite to 3NT ?
I think putting it into stayman is terrible. Too many bids that could be doubled along the way and describing opener shape when it's not necessary. I think you should either play that 2N is natural or that 2S is range ask/clubs. Stuff like GF with 5-5 is low priority as it's very rare hand comparing to run of the mill invite to 3N.

[daveharty]

I wouldn't even call it a convention, as it is both natural and nonforcing. But that's just semantics. Whether or not a treatment/convention is "good" depends on several things: Does it come up fairly frequently? Does its use preclude another, more useful meaning of the bid in question? Does the bid fill a gap in your bidding system? Is it easy to remember? Some of those questions can only be answered within the context of your partnership. Obviously 1NT-3m as natural and invitational is easy to remember, and it would be useful (particularly if you have strict requirements for the bid like 2 of the top 3 honors) when it allows partner to bid 3NT with an otherwise minimum 1NT opener if she has the missing honor. But it really depends on the rest of your system; if you have other hand-types that are difficult to bid then you need to prioritize and allocate the available bids accordingly. I usually play something very similar to what rogerclee describes and haven't had any problems, but with one partner I play exactly what you describe. I think the bid has worked well about one time in several years (in the sense that it allowed us to confidently bid a game that we wouldn't have bid if partner hadn't had the bid available). The few other times the bid has come up, it had no effect on the outcome of the hand.

[steve2005]

rogerclee, on 2012-February-19, 03:10, said:

This structure is extremely popular among people I know:

2S: clubs (bid 3C if you like it)
2N: diamonds or weak minors (bid 3D if you like it)
3C: puppet stayman
3D: 5+/5+ minors, GF (3H asks shortness)
3H: 31(54) GF
3S: 13(54) GF

This structure addresses many of your concerns. Signoff, invite, and GF with the minor are all handled by this structure (transfer to a minor then new suit = shortness and GF values). Signoff with both minors can transfer to diamonds and pass whatever partner bids (it's not perfect, but it works fine). 31(54) and less than GF values is a problem, though my experience suggests that it is not worth losing sleep over being able to show this exactly. Between upgrading it to a game force, calling it an invitational hand, and just passing 1N, you can usually just pick one.

Yes I like this. My only question and i've seen this from lots of others, so I;m sure has some merit. Why have 2♣ for regular stayman and 3♣ for puppet? They are asking similar things and you can roll everything into 2♣ and free up 3♣ for something usefull.

[Siegmund]

Assuming a strong notrump, having some way to show HHxxxx in a minor so that partner can bid a 22-point 3NT when he has the fitting honor and stop at 3m when he doesn't is a very valuable bid -. It's the only one of the notrump invitations that actually accomplishes something besides "go with 16 pass with 15". I'd gladly drop 1N-2N inv or 1N-2c-2M-3M inv from my system but I want a way to show this hand.

That way doesn't have to be a natural 3m bid, of course. You can use 2-under transfers, or you can use either 2S or 2N artificially with both of these invites, along with some other hand types, included.

[Gerben42]

Very popular around here is:

2♠ = invite / weak long minor / GF++ long minor
2NT = both minors 5-5
3♣♦ = invite with long minor
3♥ = 3♥ short ♠
3♠ = 3♠ short ♥

I never saw the point of playing Puppet after 1NT.

[aguahombre]

steve2005, on 2012-February-19, 10:45, said:

Why have 2♣ for regular stayman and 3♣ for puppet? They are asking similar things and you can roll everything into 2♣ and free up 3♣ for something usefull.

You first ask why people use two kinds of Stayman, characterize the practice as not usefull.

Apparently, the question was rhetorical. You can, in-fact, roll more things into 2♣; others find the 3♣ puppet enroute to 3NT with a three-card major useful to them, and the negative inferences from using 2C with G.F. strength only when not (4-3) in the majors also to be useful.

[bluecalm]

Quote

I never saw the point of playing Puppet after 1NT.

Me neither but probably the reason is that people use judgement here when opening 15-17 hands with 5M-3-3-2 hands and opposite hands which chose to open 1NT (comparing to being forced to by the system) puppet is not that useful.
I noticed that American pairs, who usually systematically open 1NT with every 5M-3-3-2 feel the need to have puppet available and I wouldn't second guess their judgement without any experience playing this style.

[gwnn]

The point of puppet over 1NT is that it gives away less information about the hidden hand than regular stayman.

[Cascade]

gwnn, on 2012-February-19, 12:27, said:

The point of puppet over 1NT is that it gives away less information about the hidden hand than regular stayman.

I don't think this is correct. There is an additional response to standard puppet which would seem to necessarily give more information.

[Vampyr]

Cascade, on 2012-February-19, 12:55, said:

I don't think this is correct. There is an additional response to standard puppet which would seem to necessarily give more information.

True, but over 1NT you do not need a 3♦ bid to promise a 4-card major -- if you were interested in only 4-card majors you would have started with 2♣.

[aguahombre]

Vampyr, on 2012-February-19, 13:46, said:

True, but over 1NT you do not need a 3♦ bid to promise a 4-card major -- if you were interested in only 4-card majors you would have started with 2♣.

3C is used with 4-3 or 3-x in the majors. It is also used by some (us) as semi-automatic enroute to 3NT so that 1NT-3NT can be a removable contract showing no stops in the majors.

[gwnn]

Cascade, on 2012-February-19, 12:55, said:

I don't think this is correct. There is an additional response to standard puppet which would seem to necessarily give more information.

I assume here we play 1NT-3♣; 3♦ merely denies a 5 card major. That means that responder bids 2♣ either with an invitational hand, or a gf with 44 in the majors. You can use 3♣ with all GF hands with a 4-card major, whether or not it has a 3 card fragment in the other major.

The nice sequence is

1NT-3♣
3♦-3M (promising the other major)
3NT. This wins for puppet.

There is also the slight benefit of a cheap way of confirming a spade fit on the 3-level for COG purposes.

There is some downside when you bid 3♣ without a 3-card fragment and partner confesses to a 5-card major, that makes it easier for the defence. That occurs less often than the former sequence.

[Vampyr]

aguahombre, on 2012-February-19, 13:55, said:

3C is used with 4-3 or 3-x in the majors.

Indeed. This is why you do not need 3♦ to promise a 4-card major.

[Tomi2]

Gerben42, on 2012-February-19, 11:10, said:

Very popular around here is:

2♠ = invite / weak long minor / GF++ long minor
2NT = both minors 5-5
3♣♦ = invite with long minor
3♥ = 3♥ short ♠
3♠ = 3♠ short ♥

I never saw the point of playing Puppet after 1NT.

after I started it I cant think of bidding normal Stayman anymore...
-no more overcalls like 2 dias that need some agreements
-no need to show openers major holdings in case you look for a 4-4 fit and you dont find it
-split ranges in 2clubs and 3 clubs if looking for a fit
-finding 5-3 manjor fits obviousliy...

[aguahombre]

Tomi2, on 2012-February-19, 17:40, said:

after I started it I cant think of bidding normal Stayman anymore...
-no more overcalls like 2 dias that need some agreements
-no need to show openers major holdings in case you look for a 4-4 fit and you dont find it
-split ranges in 2clubs and 3 clubs if looking for a fit
-finding 5-3 manjor fits obviousliy...

sort of...the key is knowing when to use normal Stayman and when to use 3C. But, we have sidetracked this thread plenty, already.

[steve2005]

Actually, i now know of some reason to play 3♣ as puppet. having never played it nor read about didnt know of its value as a seperate bid

[jjbrr]

sorry, gwnn wrote what i wanted to say but i wanted to point out its good to bid puppet stayman with 42 majors as well as 43 and 33