fromageGB

But that's not the point. When you are trying something new you need to make unusual distortions and overly optimistic or pessimistic views to stretch to making the new bid, to get the practice. In your shoes, it's a clear 2♣ open. :) When we started with transfer walsh (12-14 or 17+) we included 11s, poor 15s, good 16s, and opened it every other hand, almost.

Merci beaucoup. That's the great thing about the BBO forums, they give you new outlooks and ideas. Should be compulsory reading for all bridge players!

While over 1♣ (X) I play transfers with a 4+ card suit (twalsh "on"), after 1♦ (X) transfer (pass), how do you play? Jump completion with 4, completion with 2+, or what?

Bill, if you as teller know that there is a 10 card fit, and asker doesn't, you reply as if you have the queen because with 10 cards the queen drops on a 2-1 break, and in some of the 3-0 breaks you can finesse the second round. With only a 9 card fit there is a much bigger chance of losing a trick.

Don't ask me about statistics, but here's a stab. The probability of a 4432 shape(any) is 21.6%, so a quarter of that has 3 diamonds, and a third of the reduced amount has doubleton club. So I reckon a 4432 is 21.6/12% of hands. "A" = 1.8% Now, how often do you open 1♦? You play 5 card majors, and a 5+ card suit is held about 64% of the time. When not the right strength for 1NT, you will open a major about 32% of the time, the remainder split between the minors depending on your methods (longer? which if equal? clubs with balanced hand and diamonds is unbalanced?) but assume ♣ is twice as often as ♦. Then you open 1♦ 68/3% of the time. "B" = 23% The probability that a 1♦ open is 3 cards is therefore A/B or 7.8% Does this seem plausible?

My method gets you to an inferior contract if responder is short and equal length in both majors, but I would be happy to live with the possibility for the sake of the clarity in continuations. (1) Yes to the first sentence. A hand with agreed number of controls. No to the second sentence. For me I would never play a NT bid by responder as natural to play. When opener is that strong with a long suit, I must be almost AK in all 3 other suits to want to play in NT, and in that case I would check the solidity of hearts and then bid slam! Or just show all the controls and allow opener to bid the slam. So 3NT would always be a cue bid (or serious) of some sort. (2) seems improbable. Why is responder not bidding the 2S relay? If your method is to allow a long-suited responder to show a suit at the second bid (mine is at the first bid) then 2NT would be a transfer to 3♣ I guess. What is 3H? If it is a game force showing hearts, and allowing a retransfer if responder has no fit, then 3NT would be again a cue or serious with a fit. Maybe you had the sequence wrong? I think you mean it as stated, so no, never. Why wrong side a NT contract if opener has a balanced hand without hearts? What is opener supposed to do when you don't know how strong he is, nor he you?

Sorry, not the 4-level in this instance, but it is the 4-level when their suit is lower than ours. When their suit is higher than ours, a jump to 2NT and a cue both allow them to bid at the 3 level, so there is no difference. However, I like things simple, so play the same whichever way, hence 2NT for a 3 card support. I don't buy the argument about right siding a NT contract. While I can't claim to remember every hand I have played, I have never chosen a NT contract [edit - when opponents are bidding] when there is a 5-3 major fit. Maybe I sometimes should! But surely this would be so rare as to be ignorable, if you believe in the logic I stated earlier. Yes, the raise has been suggested, but it has not been made. Opener has free choice as to bid 3M or 4M, and if he prefers 3M he can still double if second seat goes on to 4m.

While it is historic and normal for the 2NT to be invitational+ 4 card support, and the cue bid to be inv+ 3 card support, this seems the wrong way round to me. With my regular partners I play 2NT = 3 card 11+hcp, and cue = 4 card 9+ hcp. My reasoning is that when you have 4 card support, they are more likely to have a fit, so bidding the cue means that they have to bid their suit at the risky 4 level. If you bid only 2NT they can easily and safely bid their suit at the 3 level. Whereas when you have only 3 card support for the 2NT, with the 11+, when they bid at the 3 level partner is able to judge to make a penalty double when appropriate. He cannot do that if 2NT showed the 4 card support.

I think the X of 2♣ should be a "displaced bid", meaning "I would have bid that" if you normally play some sort of strong artificial 2♣ rebid. Otherwise takeout. As this is not the expert forum, I am permitted to make a penalty X of the 3♣.

I prefer the 2♣ hand to be hidden, so yes, I treat it as 5-5. Another reason for this is that if responder has heart preference, doing it your suggested way he is bidding over 3♠. How does he support hearts? 4m would be a cue but it could be in either hearts or spades, while 4M would be a sign-off. This is an aspect of the "preference /strength" difficulty I have mentioned before. Conversely, by bidding spades then hearts, you can agree that over the 3♥, 4m is a cue agreeing hearts. If you have a hand you want to cue bid agreeing spades, you start with 3♠ to set the suit, then your normal cue bidding (whatever method that is) applies.

Has merits if you believe a weak long suit should bid 2♦ in the first place. Some prefer to bid a transfer immediately over the 2♣. If you do that, the NT ladder is more intuitive, as when you bid NT the more bids the stronger the hand.

(assuming you mean 2NT rather than 3x) You could, but I have always bid spades before hearts when I am 56xx. It depends on your opinions of the strong hand being dummy.

Why would North not bid 3♦ at the second bid? (1) some people play that responder should have a 7 card suit to bid it (2) some people play transfers (3) some people play responder with a long suit shows it immediately with the first bid. It's a question of choice. I think the reason sequences involving 2♠ are called "Kokish" is because Kokish came up with (as I understand it) a whole method of handling multiple suit combinations that involved a relay of 2♠ over 2♥, and 2NT over 2♠. 2NT may now be normal, but it is part of the "method", hence it is "Kokish". As to terminology, if 2♦ is obligatory, 2♣ is a puppet, 2♦ is a relay, 2♥ is a puppet, and the following 2♠ is a relay. When opener bids spades as his first suit, 2♠ is not a true puppet (you could say it was a "semi-puppet" if you like, as 2NT is the most common response), and 2NT is a relay. Responder - at least as I play it - does not always support spades immediately with support. She can have better suits elsewhere, so relays with 2NT to see if opener bids one of those as his second suit. And 2♠ could be 5 card when accompanied by a second suit.

So hey, the 2 suited variant strikes again! (Though it is a 1♠ open, you need the practice.) One up for Kokish. Not so sure about the 5♦ though. Where does opener go if she has a genuine 2♣ and you may have missed a slam? Would 4♦ have been forcing?

I may be misunderstanding you, but there is no mention of jumping. In a system like SEF there are bids you can make to describe your hand with a rebid greater than 2M, but these require greater strength. I would assume (without knowing all systems) this is pretty common. It's just that with hands with no cheap suit, or that have support, or are balanced, a rebid of 2M is made as a waiting bid if not strong enough to go higher. What's wrong with that? Therefore, while a 15+ hand can rebid NT or support partner, or a 17+ hand can bid a new (expensive) suit without a jump, there is a presumption that 2M is limited. It may of course be stronger. Having made an initial 2M rebid, you don't have to jump to 4M to show (again) that you are limited, so the bidding is kept low to allow the best contract to be found.

Depends on your policy of responder showing a say 7 card minor. If this is allowed, do you do it immediately (in place of the initial 2♦) or later? Better sort that out. But otherwise 4m has to be a cue. I can't imagine responder ever wanting to declare in 3NT, so this has to be non-serious/serious automatically agreeing the opener's major. I would think this is true whether opener has shown a single-suited major or a major-minor. To make the best of it, you need some agreement such as a direct cue is one control (only) and 3NT is two or more, in my view. The difficulty you do need to think about is as I said earlier, handling suit preference AND strength, when opener is 2-suited.

I've never tried this, does this work? When there is no fit I play at a level of NT dependent essentially on the combined hcp. With opener defining his hand by the rebid(s) possibly 3NT or 4NT, it is a simple matter for responder to add his values, and finalise the contract accordingly. With an unlimited 2NT, it is not so easy. Do you have whoever bids (in the fit exploring sequences) the final normally 3NT only bidding that if he is minimum (ie opener 24/25, or responder 0/1), and instead bidding normally impossible higher bids in 2 point steps, ie 4♣ = 2/3, 4♦ = 4/5 - have to miss out 4♥ because that would be natural in this sequence - have to miss 4♠ because that would be ace asking in this sequence - 4NT = 6/7, etc? That sounds hopelessly confusing and prone to error. And again, if for example 4♦ is normally a slam try in diamonds, you can't use that either. It would never work. Much simpler is an agreement that over opener's 3NT bid to show whatever greater strength, you just play simple transfers and ace asking.

The summary post of #44 is how I played it when I used the unspecified (waiting) 2♦ response, but without the 3♣/3♥ inversion. I guess you don't need to do the same thing with spades and a minor, because a hand with decent spade support will show it immediately instead of bidding 2NT. When opener has a minor, I play it the same as aguahombre, expected to be a 10 trick hand, but may be 9.5! More commonly 10 assuming responder has a 3 card support. How responder continues is debatable. You probably need to have opener's 3m (with all strengths) as forcing, with responses showing whether a fit or not, and whether controls or not, to allow opener to bid 4m+1 as kickback ace ask or 4m as signoff. This is the simple approach, the alternative is to just bid controls and do it all with cue bidding. This then conflicts with the bridgeguys method of responder transferring on the SECOND bid (having bid 2♦ initially) when responder has a 6 or 7 card suit. My preference is to bid a transfer at the first bid, 3♦ for hearts. What is more difficult is when opener has shown a major and a minor, say 2♠ then 3♦. Now you want to choose either (you may not have good spade support, eg xxx, and were hoping for a better second suit, but still prefer spades to diamonds) as well as indicating strength/controls. You don't want to bid 4♦ or 3♠ with a control, as that could be a sign-off. Needs discussion and probably artificiality. (This is one reason for my preference for 2♦ negative and 2♥ positive.) Incidentally, you have the same problem with the 3♣/3♥ inversion. After 2♥ 3♥ you want to bid 4♣ as a sign-off, and 4♣ as preference with control(s)!

I'm glad we agree. But the part I quoted was done by cut and paste (adding the coloured symbols afterwards) and not touching the words "Spades and Clubs". It is definitely a typo in the bridgeguys site.

Jilly, the link you gave has some dubious content. For example : " 2♣ An opening bid showing strong values. . . 2♦ Normally a waiting bid or a negative bid. Other responses, per partnership agreement, are not possible. 2♥ This is the Kokish Relay, a puppet for responder to bid an automatic 2 Spades in order that the opener can clarify his holding. . . 2♠ The puppet bid. 3♣ Opener promises a two-suited holding with Spades and Clubs." To me, that shows a 2-suiter with hearts and clubs. With spades and clubs I bid 2♣ 2♠ 3♣. And "other responses" are possible. For example, you can do an immediate transfer with a long suit, rather than starting with 2♦

Fluffy, not sure what you mean by multi-puppets, but playing 2♦ waiting followed by "puppet" compulsory next step if opener's second bid is 2♥ OR 2♠ (both are puppets) is very easy to do and seems obviously sensible. They do happen a lot (in the context of having a 2♣ open in the first place). I agree that putting the 20 count into the 2♣ ladder is unnecessary unless you have a need to use 2NT for something else, and certainly if you keep the standard 2NT opening of 20/21 and start with 2♣ when balanced 22+ it is simple and you can't go wrong. I guess a downside of including the 20 count is that you would then need a NT ladder of 3 point ranges, rather than 2 point, which makes it less useful opposite a very week hand. A thing to note, if new to this, is that when opener starts with 2♣ then 2♠, he will have a spade suit so the puppet reply of 2NT is not compulsory - you only do this when you do not have prime spade support (which shows it immediately). In contrast of course with 2♣ then 2♥ which forces a compulsory 2♠ as opener may not have hearts at all.

X may be forcing to only the 2 level in a novice game, but think about what has happened here. I am West, opening 1♣. They bid diamonds, and partner supports my clubs. They then double, looking to see if they have a major fit before they subside back into diamonds. If they find a major fit at the 2 level they then have room to make a game try. Am I going to give them all this freedom? Of course not. If they do find a major fit I will have to continue to 3♣ anyway, as a make or as a sacrifice, so I am logically going to bid 3♣ immediately over the X. On most hands, 3♣ is automatic. South should realise that. Double is therefore HIGHLY ENCOURAGING North to bid a major at the 3 level. North is bidding 3♠ quite happily. He may be a bit light in values - but South knows his style and has made allowance for that - but he has 4 card spade support, a singleton, excellent diamonds ... Nothing wrong at all, a normal bid. He has been invited to bid 3♠ with a fit, and it is a good one. As South, do I want to be in a spade game if partner has 4 poor cards, especially given his known overcalling style? No way !! Do I want to be in a heart game if partner has heart support? Yes, at IMPS I do. Perhaps I think a little more before my first bid, and decide to bid 2♥. With no heart fit, I am happy for a 3♦ partial.

Yes it's a waiting bid, but there are quite a lot of strongish holdings that can be described by another bid. Playing 5 card majors, if you do hold a 12-14 (or thereabouts) with 5 card spades, and no cheap new suit to bid, I think 2♠ is common. Without knowing exactly, I'm sure most 2♠ bids made are in this category. Jlogic would say 92%? I believe SEF, for example, needs a 15 count to bid 2NT with a balanced hand. I agree with Codo that "limited" is the first assumption that should be made when partner bids this (depending on system). Additional strength is needed to raise partner, or bid above 2♠.

Not at all, I am not espousing Raptor nor assuming it is played by the poster. I am merely saying that many people in the overcall seat try to avoid missing a potential spade fit, by whatever partnership method, such as using a X when 2-suited, so there is an inference that a hand that makes a bid of 1♦ is unlikely to have four spades. Given that South's X is positively inviting a bid of 3♠ if opener bids 3♣ (as is highly likely), if North does have spades, to do this on such a feeble spade suit when you have an excellent heart suit you have not shown, seems particularly misguided.

Furthering Art's comment on 000ffj's dislike of (or unfamiliarity with) opener's 2♠ rebid that does not show 6 cards but shows instead a weaker hand, many people play that responder's rebid if he has no clear shape-showing bid (as here) is 2NT. This is not an immediate suggestion to play in NT, but is a relay for opener to bid out his shape. He can bid a second suit (that would have been above 2♠, hence would have needed a hand with greater strength), support responder's suit, or rebid spades to show a 6 card suit. Failing all those, opener can rebid 3NT. On this hand I would bid 3♦, but there again I would not have bid 2♦ as West.