New set of responses to 2NT

[MickyB]

Edit two: Glen pointed out a flaw in the original structure, I've revised it about ten posts down.

 

When partner opens/rebids 2NT:

3♣ = 4+S, 3♦ = 4+H, 0-3S

 

2N:3♣ – respond like Stayman (3♠ with 4S4H)

Over 3♦ – 3♥ = 5+S xfer, 3♠ = 4S5+H, 3N+ = precisely 4S

Over 3♥ – 3♠ = puppet->3N, either a hand with precisely 4S or a slam-try in hearts, others = 5+S

Over 3♠ – 3N/4♣/4♦/4♥ = NAT slam-tries

 

2N:3♦ – 3♥ denies 4 hearts, 3♠ shows 4+H

Over 3♥ – 3♠ = puppet to 3N with precisely 4 hearts, others = 5+hearts

Over 3♠, 4♦ = rexfer, 3N/4♣ = NAT slam-tries, 4♥+above = slam-tries with diamonds

 

Disadvantages -

Compared to regular Stayman, there are more opportunities for the oppo to double for the lead.

Compared to puppet Stayman, we don't find out when opener has a five-card major.

There's less room for slam-tries when responder has 4-4 majors and opener has 4H but not 4S.

 

Advantages -

Obviously, the big one is freeing up 2N:3♥

4M5+m responders get to show both of their suits (unlike 2N:3♣, 3♦:4m playing Stayman)

More room for slam-tries when we have a 4-4 spade fit

 

Any thoughts? Not quite sure what 2N:3M should be, perhaps shortage?

 

It doesn't seem strictly neccessary to have 2N:3♣, 3♠ showing four cards - these hands could go above 3♠ - but then opener's 3♠ rebid would need to be very well defined, perhaps 33(43)? Obviously that's a lot of disclosure to the defence and gives responder less room to describe his hand, not sure it's worth it.

Edited May 26, 2008 by MickyB

[glen]

With 5+♠s and weak, wanting to play in just 3♠, how does one do that (2NT-3♥--3♠ with transfers)?

[MickyB]

With 5+♠s and weak, wanting to play in just 3♠, how does one do that (2NT-3♥--3♠ with transfers)?

Argh - you're right, you can't do that when opener has four hearts (2N:3C, 3D:3H, 3S:P if he does not).

[MickyB]

Ok, I can't see a way to sort that out. All may not be lost, though - see the edit at the start of my original post.

[Winstonm]

The importance in the change is in the utility of the freed 3H bid - what is an important use for 3H that requires accomodating these changes? How frequently will it occur? How important is this change compared to the memorization necessary to adapt to a new method?

[1eyedjack]

Hmm - I can't think off the top of my head of the optimal use of 3H. But I do have the imagination to realise that whatever sensible use Micky settles on it will be sufficient to overcome the disadvantages of the method over the comparison, in a situation where bidding space comes at a huge premium. Personally I don't rate the memory point as being a significant issue here.

[MickyB]

How about 3♥ as either a bust with spades or a three-suiter short in hearts? Now -

 

3♠ = not four spades

3N = four spades, to play opposite 31(54)

Higher = four spades, lacking values in hearts

[Winstonm]

Frequency is likely to be the most important consideration of what 3H should mean - the best solutions are designed usually to solve a problem. Is there some type of relatively frequent hand that 3H could show that cannot be handled in current bidding methods?

 

Certainly weak spades and/or 4144/4045(54) is possible - but will that ability sell the whole systemic change?

[MickyB]

Frequency is likely to be the most important consideration of what 3H should mean - the best solutions are designed usually to solve a problem.    Is there some type of relatively frequent hand that 3H could show that cannot be handled in current bidding methods? 

 

Certainly weak spades and/or 4144/4045(54) is possible - but will that ability sell the whole systemic change?

The (31)xx hands are pretty important too IMO...other suggestions for a meanings of 3M will be gratefully received!

[Winstonm]

MickyB,

 

I think you have done great coming up with a different idea in a difficult auction - i.e. 2NT auctions. I can't really help on what 3H might be best used as only give you of my experience with these types things.

 

The few bidding ideas of mine that have amounted to anything all started the same way - with a problem I had in the bidding that current methods did not address.

 

By way of example, I was never happy with the response systems to an opening weak 2H/2S, as the reponses did not address what seemed to be the most likely game contract, i.e., game in the opened major, so I created a new response system with this goal in mind.

 

So in my mind the question is: what problem over 2N are you trying to solve? and go from there.

 

Just my 2 cents worth.

[kenrexford]

A few thoughts come to mind.

 

Not bad, but I think a better approach (IMO) already exists.

 

3♣ Asks:

3NT = 4-4. Re-transfers. Opener always declares. 4♣/4♠ = ♣/♦ slam try, no major fit; can invert.

3♠ = five spades.

3♥ = 4+ hearts. 3♠ asks if 5 (super-accepts possible).

3♦ = 2-4 spades (3♥ asks: 3♠ = 3, 3NT = 2, 4♣+ = 4), 2-3 hearts (3♠ asks)

3♦ = transfer; may be 5♥/4♠

3♥ = transfer; may be 5♠/3♥ (Opener 3NT = 5♥/2♠)

3♠ = Quantitative minor try. Opener's 3NT non-committal; 4♣ super-accepts minor(s). Responder's 4♣/4♦ = one-suiter (+1 over 4♣); 4♥/4♠ = shortness two-suiter (+1 over 4♣); 4N = 2245/2254 (bid long at 5-L over 4♣)

 

If you really want to explore sexy, consider two-way openings based on shape. The range is wider, but the shape assistance is amazing.

 

2NT = balanced, with 4+ spades

 

3♣ = Asks for minor shape. 3♦ = 2-3 ♥, 4♠, one 4-card minor; Responder can then bid 3♥ (clubs) or 3♠ (diamonds) with 4+ of the minor and slammish, or any number of 4-level spade agreement bids. 3♥ = 4-4 majors. 3♠ = 5 spades. 3NT = 4-3-3-3.

 

3♦ = normal transfer (3♠ after transfer agrees spades but shows the heart trick source; 3NT asks for shortness)

 

3♥ = club flag; 3♠ = diamond flag. After either, may agree spades.

 

4♣/♦/♥ = spade fit, splinter

 

3NT = spade fit, no shortness, forcing.

 

2♣...2NT = balanced, with 2-3 spades

 

3♣ = Asks for major length. 3♦ = 2-3 of each major; Responder can then bid 3♥ as a delayed transfer to spades (normal stuff) or bid 3♠ as a mild+ slam try (minor-oriented). 3♥ shows 5 hearts; Responder can bid 3♠ with no fit but five spades. 3♠ shows 4♥/3♠. 3NT shows 4♥/2♠.

 

3♦ = normal heart transfer, but 3♠ after this shows 5-5.

 

3♥ = club flag; 3♠ = diamond flag.

[MickyB]

Revised structure:

 

When partner opens/rebids 2NT:

3♣ = 4+S, 3♦ = 4+H, 0-3S, 3♥ = 5S weak or three-suiter short in hearts, 3♠ = three-suiter short in spades (initally without four hearts)

 

2N:3♣ – respond like Stayman (3♠ with 4S4H)

Over 3♦ – 3♥ = 5+S xfer GF [now 3N = 3(433)], 3♠ = 4S5+H, 3N+ = precisely 4S - a bit like Smolen, really

Over 3♥ – 3♠ = puppet->3N, either a hand with precisely 4S or a slam-try in hearts, others = 5+S

Over 3♠ – 3N/4♣/4♦/4♥ = NAT slam-tries

 

2N:3♦ – 3♥ denies 4 hearts, 3♠ shows 4+H

Over 3♥ – 3♠ = puppet to 3N with precisely 4 hearts, others = 5+hearts

Over 3♠, 4♦ = rexfer, 3N/4♣ = NAT slam-tries, 4♥+above = slam-tries with diamonds

 

Disadvantages -

Compared to regular Stayman, there are more opportunities for the oppo to double for the lead.

Compared to puppet Stayman, we don't find out when opener has a five-card major.

There's less room for slam-tries when responder has 4-4 majors and opener has 4H but not 4S.

 

Advantages -

Obviously, the big one is freeing up 2N:3♥, allowing shortages to be shown below 3NT on (31)(45), (31)(36), 4144, 41(53), etc

4M5+m responders get to show both of their suits (unlike 2N:3♣, 3♦:4m playing Stayman)

More room for slam-tries when we have a 4-4 spade fit

Allows responder to choose to play 3NT opposite 3S(433) but 4♠ opposite 3S and a doubleton.

[gnasher]

Micky's and Ken's suggestions, like most standard methods, aim to maximise the number of hands that responder can show, but they do so at a significant cost in leaked information about opener's hand.

 

I used to think this was a good idea, but I've changed my mind. I that think the priority (after rightsiding the contract) should be to avoid giving away information about opener's hand. I'm happy to swap a bit of accuracy on some hands for less informative auctions on the majority.

 

With this in mind, I've been toying with this idea:

 

3♣ = both majors, at least 4-4. Opener responds as to Stayman.

   Over 3♦, 3M is Smolen.

   Over 3♥, if responder wants to know about spades he can ask with 4♣.

 

3♦ = 4+ hearts. After opener completes, responder bids:

   3♠ = four hearts

   3NT+ = five hearts

 

3H = 5+ spades

 

3S = forces 3NT, either to play 3NT or some other hands

 

3NT = four spades, choice of game

 

I've lost the ability to find opener's five card major, together with a few twiddly bits after Puppet Stayman. A bigger problem is that I've created a couple of extra opportunities for lead-directing doubles. What I've gained is that opener never tells responder something that he didn't want to know.

[MickyB]

I've actually got precisely that structure written out on my desktop from a few hours ago, Andy :D I tried to fit other hands into 3♣ and failed. Generally I agree with trying to withhold information wherever possible, but over 2NT space is at *such* a premium that I'm not convinced it should be the top priority.

[glen]

This is an interesting and fun thread for me.

 

One could run with a variation:

 

3♣: asks in ♠s

--3♦: not 4♠s

----3♥: transfer, 5+♠s

----3♠: transfer to NT, fewer than 5♠s

----3NT: 4-4 majors, to play if no ♥ fit

----4♣: 5-5+ majors, slam try

----4♦: 5-5+ majors, game going

--3♥: 2-2 majors with stopper in ♥s (hands not wanting 5-5 majors at 4 level)

----3♠: transfer to 3NT

--3♠: 4♠s

--3NT: 5♠s

 

3♦: 4+♥s, as in starting post, or perhaps a slight mod:

--3♥: not 4♥s

----3♠: transfer to 3NT

----3NT+: 5+♥s

--3♠: 4♥s

--3NT: 5♥s

 

5-4/4-5 majors are not easily handled here

 

Edit: working on the 3♣ bid for puppet stayman ideas:

 

3♣: asks in ♠s

--3♦: not 4♠s

----3♥: transfer, 5+♠s

----3♠: transfer to NT, fewer than 5♠s

----3NT: 4-4 majors, to play if no ♥ fit

----4♣: 5-5+ majors, slam try

----4♦: 5-5+ majors, game going

----3♠: transfer to 3NT

--3♥: 5♥s

----3♠: transfer to 3NT

----3NT+: 5+♠s

--3♠: 4♠s

--3NT: 2-2 majors with stopper in ♥s (hands not wanting 5-5 majors at 4 level)

--4♣+: 5♠s

 

There could be this rule for the 2NT structure:

3♠ by responder at any point is always a transfer to 3NT, and 3NT by responder, at any point, is always a particular hand type