Flameous

Ok, I'll try to give a short introduction. First, aim of all of these is to check back if opener holds a three card support for responder's major. With first three we are only discussing sequences like 1m - 1M - 1NT. Checkback stayman is the simplest, you bid 2♣ to ask for 3 card support, and if it was 1m - 1♠, also for 4 hearts. Without either you bid 2♦. I'm not sure what all kinds of hands you put through this, but I'd assume all GF hands that don't bid 3NT bid 2♣, meaning others are at most invitational. New minor forcing is pretty much the same as Checkback stayman, with the difference that it's always the new minor which is the inquiry. I think there is some standard of what hands are put through nmf but I'm not quite sure. Either GF or inv+ anyways. I don't know who had the nerve for again stealing and renaming one convention. This is apparently the one Kit Woolsey wrote about with the name two-way checkback stayman. After that it has also been known with the name XY-NT. The primary point of this method is that 2♣ is a forcing puppet to 2♦ and 2♦ is GF relay. After 2♣ you can either pass 2♦ (especially important playing walsh) or bid anything as invitational. Many also include 2NT as a transfer to clubs to fit some more hand types. My XY-NT structure is over 3 pages long so there is plenty of stuff to do if you can remember it all. XYZ is the same, but you also include sequences 1♦ - 1♥ - 1♠ and 1♣ - 1♥ - 1♠, ie. no NT rebid. I'm not a big fan of it if suit rebid shows unbalanced hand since you can't play in opener's minor then. 4th suit forcing simply means that 4th suit is artificial, usually GF but at least inv+. Comparing to those two xyz auctions, your 4th suit forcing is essentially same as NMF, but 4th suit auctions are many and all with their own twists. I don't think there is a general consensus if opener bidding 3 different suits counts as 4th suit. For which is best, well I'd say you can't live without 4th suit forcing but it's possible to live without any kind of checkback after 1NT, not that it's easy. Assuming you play walsh and have regular partner and time to work the continuations, XY-NT/z is the way to go. The amount of hands you can show is huge, probably so much that they all won't come up during your whole bridge playing career. NMF is simple standardish convention (with many tweaks of course) you can assume with most, it has the good side of still being able to play in opener's minor.

One thing to consider is having two ways to remove 3NT, other for too strong hands and other for extra distribution. I tried it but wasn't too convinced, not that it ever came up.

Congratulations, we have new troll forums :lol:

I played 2NT - 3NT as 5♠4♥ once before I was introduced to Muppet stayman, since then I've had no need. I do play 2NT - 3♣ - 3♥ - 3♠ as puppet to 3NT and 3NT as showing 5♠4♥. And for bluecalm's comfort, I only use Muppet stayman when I hold 4 card major. (3361 is exception of course) It's not a tool to look for unlikely 5-3 fits but a more precise tool for opener to show shape and diagnose those 5-4 fits.

I like the way the forums are used now. (Maybe with the addition that Sayc/2/1 forum includes all natural systems because now acol finds itself quite out of place) But if it makes any sense, I'd call current B/I rather as "Instructional". That means it would include as much all the simple questions total newcomers might have as well as these great instructional threads Inquiry has come up with. I mean really, these forums aren't really flooded with content or anything. I take a short check every day which only gets longer if I find something interesting enough to post. Even when I'm very active, that probably means less than hour a week. If some newcomers only need go through B/I, it hardly takes any time at all to go through threads and skip ones they find too hard. Also I don't think forums are the best way to get the hold of this game as a total newbie. There are good books and courses and such for that. If you try to learn the basics in a forum, it's like having one student and a dozen arguing teachers, it just doesn't work. I'm not saying that anyone shouldn't post their novice questions here, but just keep note on what kind of learning environment this is. And I like the OP's idea of notification when the required content is really for novices. If we get a flood of novice posters after this thread, it makes it much simpler for them :)

1♣ = 10-12bal/17+ - 1♦ = 0-7/14+ -> 1♥/♠ = 3+, weak NT or 4+ 17-22 unbal 1NT = 17-19 bal 2♣ = Big 2♣ as in natural systems 2x = 6+ suit, 17-19 2NT = 20-21 3x = 6+ suit, 20+ This was a simple version me and friend agreed before we ventured to play one tournament. 1M bids are bid overloaded since they are canape or natural without 6+ and still include the weak balanced range. Of course you stick a lot of minor hands into 1NT so it's not as bad as it seems.

Yay, now I got it from Justin :lol: I'd consider this a bit light for mixed but I want to give partner some leeway for 3rd seat openings. If partner doesn't routinely open AQTx of spades and little else in 3rd seat, 3♠ is just fine.

I'd have Mike's auction. If E was dealer, I might get to 5♦ after 1♦ - 1♥ 1♠ - 2NT (1♠ is unlimited with ♣s, 2NT is nat inv, we open very light so this is quite borderline GF.) Though 3NT is clear at MPs. Or certainly after 1♦ - 1♥ 1♠ - 1NT (Again 1♠ clubs, now 1NT weak or GF relay, rest is natural) 2♦ - 2NT 3♦ - 5♦ At MPs, it's possible though that 3NT is bid instead of 1NT or 2NT.

I play WJSs, ranging from 4-7 or so. My 1M+2M is 8-10, 6 card suit. 1M+3M is like you said, about a GF but passable with no support at all. This is on the fine line whether it's a 3 or 4 bid. Without those T9 of Hs it's clear 3. I think I'd also bid 3 now but add anything and it's 4H. I'd expect about ace more for 4sf auction.

4♥ Action double means exactly what it says. It's a double and it's an action. Why would you want to take action after showing your hand with 4♥? Because you have something unexpected. Because partner won't know exactly what it is, you must at least have extra defense because partner will sit it some part of the time. Some part of the time he will bid 5H to make or save. It's possible for him to even bid 4NT to look for a possible minor fit, with say 2155 or so. IMO word optional describing double is way more vague. mich-b, I don't quite follow your point about not bidding 4 if not able to double later. Do you feel happier bidding 2H and passing after 4S comes back to you?

For MP I'd say option e) At IMPs I see uses for both Ken's suggestion and Justin's suggestion. The other minor should always be weak to bid this. Then it just comes down to frequency analysis ;)

There are some style issues related. For example if you can bid inv minor raise with 4 card major, it's important to check for them later. However, I think the most important thing is to dedicate first step for all balanced hands. I don't really mind what you do with other bids, but bidding stoppers with nothing know about the shape makes sensible slam investigation impossible. Over 1♣ - 2♣ this is simple, after diamonds you may need some more complex structure to check for the heart stop.

I ditched Namyats but I play 3NT as a strong pre in a major. It shows 8-9 or 8,5-9,5 playing tricks depending on vul or more, like 10+ with a void when Namyats bidder continues with exclusion. It always shows solid or solid without the ace suit. Point for this is that we never have to agree on the suit, we always manage with just blackwood.

There is a similar deal in last deal of the week. They are readable on bbo so I'd suggest everyone to check it up if haven't already done so. I was pretty sure this was a nonmaterial squeeze when I saw the deal but I couldn't figure it out. My head explodes when I have to count all suits in all combinations :P

When you hold weak balanced hand, I'd advice to just suck it up and pass. Your chances of finding a playable 4-4 fit are really small and some part of that time your partner holds a monster and has them set in his own hand. And depending on your opps' methods, opener might still bid a five card suit. With weak hand and 5 card or longer suit it's simple, you just bid it. 2NT natural inv is practically useless, so I'd use it for strong two suited hand that doesn't want to pass the double. 3x should probably be distributional invite, again one that doesn't want to gamble partner finding the right lead. ahydra pretty much covered the more important ground of what to do when they try to run.

1) Never ever overcall 4 card suits on 2 lvl. X > 1NT > P >>> 2♦ Game should be found though, 3♦ is some what a courtesy raise here that could be made with about ace less, this seems more like 2♠. 2) You are in a tight spot here, I'd probably overcall 3♦ due the good suit but it's borderline. There are some jokers with doubles after partner pre-empts, but I prefer to take them for real. Thus for me 3♥ wouldn't be forcing here. If it is forcing, then it has to be game forcing, meaning that stopping in 3♠ was weird. I don't think 3♠ shows extra values in that case. 3) Without tools to split point ranges better, these borderline hands are a problem. I think this is a 2♦ bid but I know many jump with every 17 count they get their hands on. With W I'd raise to 3♦ without a second thought, there's even always a fit which wouldn't be true with forcing NT.

Your north is missing the ♠Q. Was a neat trick, but I doubt it should really work with these cards. I remember falling for this last summer, executed by some 10 year old kid. Damn it made me feel humiliated :huh:

Seems like we should start winning hand, ♥A, heart ruff, ♣A, club ruff, heart ruff high Now we are down to A - AKQx Qx Q98 x xxx - Now we have two lines, cash a spade, take a club ruff. My squeeze prospects seem quite good and if ♣K came down in three rounds I'm already home. Another possibility is of course taking two more ruffs but then you need trumps breaking which seems worse. I'm not sure if you could safely fit some extra chances of J singleton or doubleton in diamonds if you abandon full cross ruff from the start.

What are your relay breaks after 2♣? It seems to me that AKxx support should be able to show that most of the time, even if partner can be weak. It seems you could do some interesting optimization with all those negative inferences with still keeping essentially the same basic structure. Like here playing in 4♠ is totally impossible, so 4♦+4♠ c/should be KC for ♦. If you consider that too high, then only solution seems to be making some case by case rules like here that you can't RKC in ♥s. Btw, 5233 18-20 with nothing wasted in spades comes up practically never, I wouldn't dedicate a bid for that.

Noting the problems with sys on after 1♦ and 1♥ overcalls is quite straightforward. If we assume the standardish interpretation that 1C (1D) X shows both majors, with sys on we don't have a direct way to show both majors and are at disadvantage there. However noting the frequencies sys on comes out ahead quite a bit. (Even more so if you happen to play reverse flannery or such) With 1C (1H) 1S/X the situation is about differentiating directly between 4 and 5 spades compared to having X be 4+ and reserve 1♠ for other hands. Here I still play the standard way of X being 4 and 1S 5+, I see merits in both but I think standard copes a bit better in competition which is more important than having our some very good structure when opps won't bid anymore. Sidetracking a bit, what do you use XX for after double? Transfer to diamonds was already mentioned but it seems bit backwards as the whole point of transfer walsh was to show the majors. Atm I play penaltyish but it seems just as rare as it always does. I guess going 2-under transfers could do some funny things but I'm not sure if it's worth it.

Automatic double. I have excellent undisclosed 5 card suit, shortness in opponent's suit and all my values are working except ♣Q. If this isn't double, I might as well play penalty doubles after 1NT getting overcalled.

Mainly agree with kgr but I think 2♣ was quite bad. Usually you'd expect weakish 55 for this. I don't really see how short spades enter this in any way, it's only a good thing defending hearts. We have bad suit for 2♣ and we also hold GF opposite XX, I don't think 2♣ is forcing. We also have no way to come out of the woods later as the bidding here shows. However S was out of his mind not bidding 4♦ over 3♠.

It might subject your partner to a squeeze assuming that AQ or AK scenario.

I have never thought of this situation. Maybe because usually opps only argue due being in ridiculous game or not being there. Given an abstract situation like here, I sure as hell would do it. At least for the laughs. I consider good laughs easily worth more than 1IMP :D But so early in the set, I can see psychological effects also making it worthwhile. Just hope your partner won't start asking questions or laughing out loud. ;)

Seems I didn't really make throughout analysis, since it's always makable if declarer holds 4♦. So essentially we can just give partner negative attitude in diamonds and hope he can make better analysis than I did, meaning I must hold ♥J if we wish to beat it. Naturally better if we can do this with lavinthal indications. I guess it might be still useful to make partner discard ♦Q from doubleton, not all declarers can manage the hand if I hold on to diamonds.