[AL78]

Auctions that start with 1NT are mostly easy thanks to the limited hand, Stayman, Transfers and other bits and bobs that make slam investigation straightforward. Here is one hand where it is not obvious what to do.

Teams:

---

1NT is 15-17, your call?

[P_Marlowe]

Pass.

In a similar situation, I choose Stayman, got lucky, discovered a heart fit, 4H made.
Maybe I had an add. Jack, not that it makes the bid any better.

[DavidKok]

This is a hand that falls outside most standard treatments. Stayman followed by 3m is usually forcing, the hand is too weak for making a game try unless partner happens to have hearts, and most people do not have a way to show both minors to begin with.

In standard (maybe with 4-way transfers or some other way to get to 3m) you have to choose between 1NT and 3♣. With 22-24 combined points I think 1NT is fine despite the spade weakness. Plus, the opponents might compete (they are likely to have 9 spades between them), and then we have a descriptive takeout double available. I'd like one spade for this takeout double, but we have enough strength to make up for it. Even with the possibility of spade ruffs I like 1NT better than 3♣ - two extra tricks is a lot, and partner might have spade values that take tricks in 1NT but not in 3♣.
Pass for me.

If I was playing Heeman I think I would show both minors to let partner pick between 3♣ and 3♦.

As a side note, your partnership tendency to open 1NT with a five card major might influence this decision. If you do that regularly/always that's an extra argument for pass, since you might be forcing us into a misfit opposite 5=3=3=2 when opponents can not even compete.

[Cyberyeti]

I habitually play a weak NT with 1N-2♣-2♠-3♣ as end of auction, this treatment is less attractive in a strong NT context.

I could also bid 1N-2♠ weak with one minor or GF with both, and if partner bids 3♣ showing 4 dismonds sign off in 3♦, otherwise play 3♣.

Opposite a strong NT you could easily make 5m, but it's very difficult to determine that it's good fast enough.

[AL78]

I decided to pass. Stayman is a complete gamble on finding a heart fit, works beautifully if one exists, could be horrible if it doesn't. The full deal:

---

6 imps out when opponents made 3NT at the other table played by West. Partner got a spade lead, teammate sitting North led a heart. Evidently North didn't find a diamond lead when in with the ♣K. 3NT can go off with four top losers and the club finesse wrong, but NS only have two opportunities to cash those tricks before declarer has set up nine. Suppose I can put this one down to bad luck.

[DavidKok]

Getting to 3NT by West is interesting. Do you happen to have the auction?

It is not your duty to take special action to protect against your teammates' defence.

[AL78]

DavidKok, on 2021-November-27, 11:06, said:

Getting to 3NT by West is interesting. Do you happen to have the auction?

It is not your duty to take special action to protect against your teammates' defence.

---

They were playing a weak NT.

[DavidKok]

And four-card majors, and a version of bridge where 4♥ does not pay extra, it seems.

[Cyberyeti]

DavidKok, on 2021-November-27, 17:53, said:

And four-card majors, and a version of bridge where 4♥ does not pay extra, it seems.

Well 4♥-1 doesn't pay extra

Also in every version of 4 card majors I know, you open 1♥ with both majors.

[AL78]

Cyberyeti, on 2021-November-28, 03:37, said:

Well 4♥-1 doesn't pay extra

Also in every version of 4 card majors I know, you open 1♥ with both majors.

If our teammates failed to find the defence to take 3NT down, they may have failed to take 4♥ down as well.

Most club players in the UK play some variant of Acol, so the standard opening would be 1♥. It is a feature at this bridge club that strange or poor actions quite often are rewarded (kind of makes me glad I'm playing very infrequently now ).

[Douglas43]

AL78, on 2021-November-27, 11:14, said:

---

They were playing a weak NT.

And they opened 1♠ with 4-4 majors? Seriously???

[AL78]

Douglas43, on 2021-November-28, 07:58, said:

And they opened 1♠ with 4-4 majors? Seriously???

Yes. I went back onto RealBridge and checked the auction again to make sure. Only the player concerned knows why.

[Mariner1]

You should absolutely bid, not pass. Your hand is worth 7 highs plus good distribution count if you can find any fit. So the positives of reaching a game outweigh the risks of bidding by a large margin. Hands such as this is why you should be playing Stayman with hearts first responses.

Opponents pass throughout though you can handle any interference easily enough.

1N - 2C Stayman

2D no major - bid 2 hearts which is a warning to P - if p bids 2 Spades now showing short hearts bid 3 clubs to play.

2 Hearts - I raise this to game 4 Hearts.

2 Spades - 3 clubs natural invitational (no I do not love this bid but you can't have always have everything)

(Note that which is popular is very often the totally wrong bidding methods to be using.}

[mikeh]

Mariner1, on 2021-November-28, 18:46, said:

You should absolutely bid, not pass. Your hand is worth 7 highs plus good distribution count if you can find any fit. So the positives of reaching a game outweigh the risks of bidding by a large margin. Hands such as this is why you should be playing Stayman with hearts first responses.

Opponents pass throughout though you can handle any interference easily enough.

1N - 2C Stayman

2D no major - bid 2 hearts which is a warning to P - if p bids 2 Spades now showing short hearts bid 3 clubs to play.

2 Hearts - I raise this to game 4 Hearts.

2 Spades - 3 clubs natural invitational (no I do not love this bid but you can't have always have everything)

(Note that which is popular is very often the totally wrong bidding methods to be using.}

In NA, at least, the auction 1N 2C 2S 3C is game forcing. It shows 5+ clubs. If playing 4 way transfers, it will show 6 clubs only with 4 hearts.

Since we have a clue that partner is more likely than usual to hold 4 or 5 spades, I think bidding 2C is a huge gamble

Edit: playing that as invitational seems generally misdirected. Games and slams are more important than stopping in 3C, especially since opener may be 5=3=3=2 or 4=3=4=2. How on earth do you explore for a high club contract if 3C is unavailable and you are say 1=4=3=5?

[nullve]

AL78, on 2021-November-27, 08:17, said:

Auctions that start with 1NT are mostly easy thanks to the limited hand, Stayman, Transfers and other bits and bobs that make slam investigation straightforward. Here is one hand where it is not obvious what to do.

Teams:

---

1NT is 15-17, your call?

2♣ (Stayman) followed by

• P over 2♦ (risking 2♦ on a 4-2 fit opposite 3325) if Crawling Stayman is not available
  
• 2♥ over 2♦ if Crawling Stayman is available (it should be!)
  
• 4♥ over 2♥
  
• 3N over 2♠ (having avoided a spade lead)

.

[Mariner1]

mikeh, on 2021-November-28, 21:46, said:

In NA, at least, the auction 1N 2C 2S 3C is game forcing. It shows 5+ clubs. If playing 4 way transfers, it will show 6 clubs only with 4 hearts.

Since we have a clue that partner is more likely than usual to hold 4 or 5 spades, I think bidding 2C is a huge gamble

Edit: playing that as invitational seems generally misdirected. Games and slams are more important than stopping in 3C, especially since opener may be 5=3=3=2 or 4=3=4=2. How on earth do you explore for a high club contract if 3C is unavailable and you are say 1=4=3=5?

-----

Sorry, 1N - 2C - 2S - 3C is/should be invitational or you need to change your system agreements.

1N - 3C is/should be forcing

And some now use the 4 suit transfer to 3 C as in 1N - 2S - 2N/3C depending - any bid other than 3 clubs in forcing (suit is still clubs). So this is used when either weak or very strong and not the middle ground which is the 1N - 2C - a major - 3minor as suggested for invitational).

[mikeh]

Mariner1, on 2021-December-01, 00:08, said:

-----

Sorry, 1N - 2C - 2S - 3C is/should be invitational or you need to change your system agreements.

1N - 3C is/should be forcing

And some now use the 4 suit transfer to 3 C as in 1N - 2S - 2N/3C depending - any bid other than 3 clubs in forcing (suit is still clubs). So this is used when either weak or very strong and not the middle ground which is the 1N - 2C - a major - 3minor as suggested for invitational).

So how do you bid with say x AQxx xxx AKJxx?

For most, at least in NA, one responds stayman, in case we have a heart fit, and then, when partner responds either 2D or 2S, we bid 3C.

Btw, my notrump structure is different from ‘standard’ in both of my serious partnerships….in one it’s very non-standard, but in both bidding 3m after opener’s response to stayman is forcing. As is common in expert partnerships, our methods are the result of a lot of (ongoing) work.

We do play four suit transfers, but note that it’s standard to play that a transfer to a minor denies a major, and that is the way I play in both.

It’s possible to play 1N 2N (diamond transfer) 3C/D 3M as showing 4M with a longer minor. But that’s not standard. Standard is that 3M there shows shortness. That is powerful because it can allow one to avoid a bad 3N and/or reach some nice slams when opener has no wastage in that suit. Meanwhile, playing 1N 2N 3D 3S as natural and forcing requires artificiality for opener should he fit spades….he needs to be able to show spades and a minimum as well as show spades and a maximum…if he has to raise to 4S on all hands with 4S, responder risks getting too high with slam interest when opener is minimum or, conversely, risk missing a slam if he passes and opener is maximum. In addition, opener often won’t know whether or when to bid 3N or to commit to 5D. Also, I’ve never seen anyone use a minor transfer without a 6+ suit.

I’m always interested in new structures but you most definitely haven’t persuaded me that playing 1N 2C 2S 3C should be invitational. Btw, telling me that I’m wrong but without explaining the logic behind your approach is not the best way to persuade me.

When designing structures such as responses to notrump openings, one needs to develop a coherent approach: one that deals reasonably well with almost all anticipated hand types (although no method deals well with balanced terrible hands…one passes and hopes not to get doubled and the OP hand is tough for our methods). If you want, for example, to convince someone that playing 1N 2C 2x 3C is invitational, you need to address how one shows a forcing hand with 4M and 5+ minor. Also how one bids, say, 3136 with a good hand. And so on.

Hey, maybe you’ve thought of something that has escaped me. As I say, I’m always interested in learning. But so far all you’ve done is state conclusions without explaining why you think they’re optimal.

[Douglas43]

It seems to me there are three options for 3♣, weak, invitational, or forcing.

In pre-transfer days it was normally weak in the UK, as the only way to run to clubs from a weak NT. Now people transfer, so unless you are one of the few who don't play transfers, I think this can be ruled out as not adding value.

That leaves invitational or forcing. Mikeh above makes a number of points about technical merit. I would add that frequency is relevant. You are more likely to have 9/10+ hcp than an 8/ bad 9 count

[Cyberyeti]

Douglas43, on 2021-December-02, 08:34, said:

It seems to me there are three options for 3♣, weak, invitational, or forcing.

In pre-transfer days it was normally weak in the UK, as the only way to run to clubs from a weak NT. Now people transfer, so unless you are one of the few who don't play transfers, I think this can be ruled out as not adding value.

That leaves invitational or forcing. Mikeh above makes a number of points about technical merit. I would add that frequency is relevant. You are more likely to have 9/10+ hcp than an 8/ bad 9 count

I think weak/strong NT makes a difference here, it definitely has more value opposite weak to play it as sign off as we do, but also 2416 being able to at least explore the 4-4 heart fit before signing off in clubs does help.

We have ways of bidding the forcing 4-6s but they can get a little clumsy and show the club suit at the 4 level, but they're a pretty rare hand type opposite a weak NT and confirm values for 4N.

[mycroft]

In my weak NT structure, I play Keri, and we do play 2NT transfer to clubs then 3M as the GF 4-longer hand. But that's one of the reasons Keri is more suited to a weak NT - we play a lot more hands from the "weak side", because in a game auction, there is no "weak side". Yes, transfers have another purpose besides right-siding (which is why Keri also plays transfers), but it is a strong argument. Stayman then minor to show GF "other major + long minor" is a right-siding tool.

I've played Stayman-then-minor as invitational (and not promising a major) for several years. It worked quite well. But it's just less efficient, in a NA-style strong NT system, than Mike's (and ACBL standard) style. Note: In Keri, because 2♣ *isn't* Stayman (it isn't even asking, it's telling), 2♣ then 3m is straight-up invitational. But again, "plays more hands from [responder]".

Also, "invitational", in a minor, means what exactly? To me, it means "if this suit is one-loser, we make 3NT. If not, we don't." It definitely doesn't mean "go on good 16, let's play 3m instead of 2NT on a bad hand". And a decent minor transfer system, where you can superaccept below game to say "I have enough fillers for you in the trump suit such that, if you have that hand, the suit is one-loser at best", means that there's no need for a specific invitational sequence. So, use it for another, very useful one.