Stayman sequence

[fachiru]

[hv=d=n&v=b&s=skj107h987da98c652]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

Your expert partner opens 1nt [15-17] as dealer at IMPs/red and I'll force a 2 ♣ stayman bid on your hand. Partner responds 2 ♥, which does not deny spades.

What is your next bid if you had to pick from the 3 options given and why?

[rbforster]

Being consistent is over-rated I know, but I bid 2♣ because I was interested in playing in spades if there was a fit. Following through with that is 2♠ here (unless you don't play 1N-2N as natural and I had to invite via 2♣).

[ArtK78]

I am going to assume that we are playing 4-suit transfers; therefore, 2♣ Stayman must be bid on all balanced invitational hands, with or without a 4 card major.

 

I would bid 2NT, but I don't feel strongly about it. 2♠ by me shows 4 spades and an invitational hand. I am treating this hand as a balanced invitational hand without a four card major.

 

If 2♣ Stayman promised a 4-card major, this issue is not relevant, and the poll questions are not relevant. In that case, 2♠ would show a 5-card suit, so that is clearly not correct.

[TylerE]

With one partner I play that 1N-2♣-2♦-2M is a weaker invite to 3N than 2N over 2♦. Playing that way, 2♠ here is right.

[SoTired]

If partner has both majors, I want to be in spades, because partner has a doubleton minor.

 

what to bid depends on agreed conventions. Some partnerships that use 2N for a diam transfer, use the sequence 1N-2C-2H-2S to show a 4♠ with 8-9 HCP and 1N-2C-2H-2N to show 8-9 HCP with no 4-card major.

If I am playing that convention, then I bid 2S.

 

Otherwise, I bid 2N, which should show 4♠ and 8-9 HCP.

[helene_t]

I am confused. I thought it was "standard" that 2NT shows four spades while 2♠ is an idle bid to be defined by partnership (with one p I play it as invitational with five+ spades, with another p as weak with 4 spades and longer minor, with a 3rd p we play 4-way transfers so 2♠ now shows a natural 2NT response to 1NT).

 

Is it normal in North America that 2♠ shows an invitational hand with four spades? In that case I suppose I have to bid that.

[skjaeran]

This comes down to agreements. I use 4-way transfers and have to Stayman first on balanced invites. But over 2♥ I use 2♠ as a GF relay, asking for distribution. So I'd have to rebid 2NT here.

 

If a direct 2NT would be a natural invite I'd assume 2NT over 2♥ would imply 4-card spades, and that 2♠ could be used for other purposes (GF relay?).

 

So 2♠ as a 4-card invite here only makes sense to me if a direct 2NT wasn't available. If so, I'd rebid 2♠.

[bid_em_up]

I won't say that I am an expert partner, but our (fachiru's and mine) agreements are as follows (he did not give a full explanation, imo):

 

We play 4 way transfers.

We have no direct invitational raise to 2N available.

2H in response to a stayman inquiry, does not deny 4 spades, a 2S in response to 2C denies 4 hearts.

A bid of 2C does not promise a 4 card major as it is the only way to invite with a balanced inviational hand that does not have a four card major.

 

Under these conditions, it is my opinion that the hand making a stayman inquiry with four spades MUST bid 2S (after 1N-2C-2H) to show that it has spades, in order to cater to the 1N opener being 4-4-(3-2).

 

Fachiru doesn't agree.

 

So the question really is:

 

Under the conditions above, does the 2NT rebid deny a 4 card major?

 

He says it does not deny one, I say that it does. If you had 4 spades, you would have bid 2S.

 

Some people may choose to rebid 2N (denying four spades), and they are within their rights to do so, but then I think they also realize that they are varying from what their systemic bid should be. Thats a different story.

 

Otherwise, you end up in 2N/3N down 2-3, when a 4-4 fit spade fit was available.

[pclayton]

2♠. Yes its obvious (for me anyway), unless I'm playing with someone that plays transfer extensions.

 

I suppose with Jxxx xxx AJT QTx I might have a problem.

[helene_t]

If 2♠ shows a 4-card spades and is non-forcing then it becomes a judgment issue if this hand should bid 2♠ or 2NT. The latter denies four spades but maybe a 4333 wants to play in notrump.

 

It is not quite clear whether that is the purpose of the poll, or whether we are supposed to vote for our pet stayman variant, or for what we think is standard.

[TylerE]

I see no reason for 2NT to deny spades. If pard cares, he can always checkback with 3♠ on the way to game.

[mike777]

1nt=2c

2h=2s allows you to play 2s when that is best in 4-4 fit. If you dont play this then you just agree to play 2nt and miss 4-4 spades.

[P_Marlowe]

2NT, the system bid?

 

I may have missed something, and maybe 2NT

denies a 4 card major, but undiscussed 2NT is

the system bid.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Lobowolf]

I see no reason for 2NT to deny spades. If pard cares, he can always checkback with 3♠ on the way to game.

It's when opener's not interested in game that you'd rather find the spades at the 2-level.

[Lobowolf]

I am confused. I thought it was "standard" that 2NT shows four spades while 2♠ is an idle bid to be defined by partnership (with one p I play it as invitational with five+ spades, with another p as weak with 4 spades and longer minor, with a 3rd p we play 4-way transfers so 2♠ now shows a natural 2NT response to 1NT).

 

Is it normal in North America that 2♠ shows an invitational hand with four spades? In that case I suppose I have to bid that.

It frees up 1NT - 2NT for bigger and better things.

[NickRW]

Under these conditions, it is my opinion that the hand making a stayman inquiry with four spades MUST bid 2S (after 1N-2C-2H) to show that it has spades, in order to cater to the 1N opener being 4-4-(3-2).

 

Fachiru doesn't agree.

Given your agreements, I would interpret it your way. I don't see how we can find our spade fit otherwise - perhaps your partner can explain how to get round this.

 

Nick

[benlessard]

Playing 4 way transfer is pretty standard among expert. So after 2H responder may or may not have 4S so you need a way to make the distinction.

 

1st way. 2Nt show 4S and is invitationnal. 2S is range ask and denies 4S

 

Advantage

 

You have an extra slamming tool with 2S.

You are not wrongsiding the contract if 4-4 spades fit exist.

 

disadvantage

 

You allow a lead directing double of 2S.

 

2nd way.

 

2S is invitaionnal with 4S

2Nt is invitationnal without 4S

 

Advantage

 

You may stop in 2S in 4-4 or 4-3 fit.

[fachiru]

I am going to assume that we are playing 4-suit transfers; therefore, 2♣ Stayman must be bid on all balanced invitational hands, with or without a 4 card major.

 

I would bid 2NT, but I don't feel strongly about it.  2♠ by me shows 4 spades and an invitational hand.  I am treating this hand as a balanced invitational hand without a four card major.

 

If 2♣ Stayman promised a 4-card major, this issue is not relevant, and the poll questions are not relevant.  In that case, 2♠ would show a 5-card suit, so that is clearly not correct.

About your last paragraph, Art: I'm not sure I'm getting this. An invitational hand with 5 ♠ would transfer and follow up with 2NT; it would not go thru Stayman and rebid in ♠.

 

Playing 4-suit tranfers should you also play that Stayman does not garantee a 4M?

I'm not sure I like that; I'd rather blast to game or pass 1NT then lose that.

[ArtK78]

I am going to assume that we are playing 4-suit transfers; therefore, 2♣ Stayman must be bid on all balanced invitational hands, with or without a 4 card major.

 

I would bid 2NT, but I don't feel strongly about it.  2♠ by me shows 4 spades and an invitational hand.  I am treating this hand as a balanced invitational hand without a four card major.

 

If 2♣ Stayman promised a 4-card major, this issue is not relevant, and the poll questions are not relevant.  In that case, 2♠ would show a 5-card suit, so that is clearly not correct.

About your last paragraph, Art: I'm not sure I'm getting this. An invitational hand with 5 ♠ would transfer and follow up with 2NT; it would not go thru Stayman and rebid in ♠.

 

Playing 4-suit tranfers should you also play that Stayman does not garantee a 4M?

I'm not sure I like that; I'd rather blast to game or pass 1NT then lose that.

If you play 2NT as natural and invitational, then Stayman promises a 4-card major. Stayman followed by 2♠ over 2♦ shows an invitational 5-4. I really had not thought about what 2♠ shows over a 2♥ response to Stayman. That bid does not really exist if you play transfers and natural 2NT invites. Helene suggested some uses for the bid in her post.

[Stephen Tu]

[all in the context of 1nt-2nt artificial, all invs have to go through 2c]

 

Having embarked on this dubious adventure, your main hope of gain vs. those that didn't stayman is finding partner with some 4432 hand where spades does better than NT. I don't see why you want to give up on 1/3 of these by bidding 2nt over 2h.

 

What is the expected gain in bidding 2nt and burying spade fits? Concealment on the opening lead when partner has no spade fit? Playing in NT with a 4-4 spade fit and hoping it makes the same tricks? I don't think that's very much compared to getting to spade fit, at this point.

 

 

I see no reason for 2NT to deny spades. If pard cares, he can always checkback with 3♠ on the way to game.

(1) Now when declarer bids 3nt the defense doesn't know whether or not he has 4S

(2) Spade fit can be safer/higher scoring than NT, plus you can play it at the 2 level if opener is min and doesn't want to go to game

[jdonn]

What is the expected gain in bidding 2nt and burying spade fits?

The fact that you can use 2♠ for something else. This wouldn't really matter, except the problem is if you use 1NT 2♣ 2♥ 2♠ as invitational with four spades, you can hardly use 1NT 2♣ 2♦ 2♠ as anything at all (unless you also want to use that as invitational with four spades, which seems utterly pointless), and you are wasting a very low and potentially useful bid. So really what you have to weigh is:

 

Playing in 2NT instead of 2♠ with a minimum 1NT opener that has 4-4 in the majors opposite an invitational responder that has 4 spades and < 4 hearts

 

vs.

 

Getting use out of 1NT 2♣ 2♦ 2♠, which should also be useful on 1NT 2♣ 2♥ 2♠

 

To me the second option is clearly better, of course depending what you use 2♠ as. I can think of at least two things I really like, and a third I don't mind.

[mike777]

1nt=2c

2h=2s invite with 4 spades.

 

1nt=2c

2d=2s=invite with 4h and 5s.

 

 

1nt=2c

2d=2nt invite, may or maynot have 4 card major.

[jdonn]

1nt=2c

2h=2s invite with 4 spades.

 

1nt=2c

2d=2s=invite with 4h and 5s.

 

 

1nt=2c

2d=2nt invite, may or maynot have 4 card major.

Yes you at least fill the hole that way, but now you are using both bids, each for a very specific range and a very specific shape, and all when you could have not had the system available and probably done just as well most of the time. I think people can do better.

[Stephen Tu]

If you want to use 1nt-2c-2h-2s as something artificial, then fine, but then you are going way off topic IMO and going to a general "what system should I play over 1nt" discussion. Clearly the original poster is reserving 2s for 4 cd spade invitational and isn't using it for something else.

 

He was suggesting:

2s = 4s inv

2nt = inv, may or may not have major (rather than deny major)

 

and asking which should be chosen given this agreement.

 

My comment was in that context, I don't see any point in not bidding 2s if it shows 4s inv, which is roughly what you have. Playing 2s as artificial clearly isn't possible without extensive discussion, and if it was artificial then probably this hand wouldn't be a candidate for that bid and OP wouldn't ask what people would be choosing.

[jdonn]

Who said artificial? It's arguably more common, or at least very common, to make it an unbalanced invitation with 5 spades, which not only lets you stop lower when you have that hand but lets partner make better decisions when you transfer and bid 2NT.

 

Anyway you asked a question (rhetorically I guess) so I answered it. The expected gain from not using 2♠ as four spades invitational is that you can use it as something else (which can also translate to other similar bids). I don't find that off topic.

 

I think the problem here is I took the original question more to mean "is 2♠ four spades invitational undiscussed" but you took it as "what do you bid if 2♠ is four spades invitational?", which doesn't make sense to me since the answer to the second question is quite obvious.