ideas for a NT structures

[benlessard]

2C = asking for 4/5H minimum (almost a puppet to 2D) to show...

 

D transfers Gf or to play

Inv with 4H or a long M

Inv with no M

 

 

2C-----??

 

2H minimum with 4/5 H

2D anything else

 

2C------2D-------???

 

2H = H inv (5 or +)

2S = S Inv (5 or +)

2NT = inv with or without 4H

rest is D GF

 

 

2C-------2H--------???

 

pass = I was inv with 4H (maybe 5H is possible ?)

2S = Inv with 5S

2Nt = Inv

3H = (maybe) I was Inv with 5H

rest is D GF

 

 

--------------------------------------------

2D + 2H are transfers to play or 4/5 carder GF (no inv hand there)

 

 

2D------2H (forced)---???

 

Pass = 5H soff

rest is GF with 4 or 5 H

 

---------------------------------------------------------------

 

2S is INV with 4 spades

 

(this may seems a waste of space but our NT is wide ranging so our inv bids are frequent and necessary)

 

---------------------------------------------------------------

2Nt and +

 

Minors inv

GF no M (without D as primary suit)

GF with clubs

puppet stayman or similar gadget

-------------------------------------------------

 

advantages

 

a lot of inv bidding that allow you to stay in 2M instead of (3M/2NT)

keeping transfers

D transfer to play or GF

a M transfer followed by 2Nt or by 3M is forcing

 

------------------------------------------------

disadvantages.

 

2S isnt free for MSS/rangecheck/club transfers

no bid for inv (4S + 4/5H) (with 5S and 4/5H you start by 2C followed by 2S)

probably some stuff wont fit in at 2Nt and 3 level

No garbage stayman

[effervesce]

Have you looked at heeman?

 

http://www.jackbridge.com/pdf/eheeman.pdf

[csdenmark]

This approach looks silly to me. I think it is fairly standard that Stayman is start for GF. Any other point in changing that than confusion?

 

I see no point in 2-level GF transfers - better to use 4-level transfers for that.

 

The solid way you will find by many players - one of the solid pairs are Belladonna-Garozzo.

[benlessard]

Yep i know Heeman.

 

The difference is that Heeman will play at the 3 level or 2NT when 4-4 M fit and opener is minimum.

 

Also i believe that transfers followed by 3m should be GF (not INV) unless by a passed hand where slam is impossible.

 

 

1NT-----2C

2D------???

 

2H is better as inv with 5/6H than as a 2nd transfer to S. We are playing a wide NT range so if partner is min i want to play 2H not 2NT/3H. The same reason why i dont like the 3D multi-inv wich make you play 3M. (I like to play the multi inv at 2D in a non-transfers setup a method wich i tought i was the inventor but its in the C & M conventions by M.Lindkvist)

 

Also in my method when opener super accept a transfer he know that responder has 5 or is GF. To super A with KQxx and a dead minimum hand is pointless if partner has 4H inv. You will play 3H for no good reason.

 

With a wide Nt range its important to have INV bids, but for me the INV that really matters are the inv that let you play at 2M, INV that let you play 3m instead of 3NT yield a little profit but inv that let you play 3M instead of 4M are almost worthless at IMPS.

2 or 4 is my motto for majors at imps.

 

 

Also

transfers followed by 2NT GF is a huge gain, it help make the difference between 4M+longer m or 5M+m

 

---------------------------- an other little thing i dont like about Heeman

 

 

1NT------3C is forcing 3D to show 4441 or to soff in 3D

 

You can soff at 2D with 2C (less preemptive i agree) and to use scanian transfers to show 4441

 

1NT------2D

2H-------3S = 1444

 

1Nt-----2D(H 4or+)

2H-----2S (4S)

2Nt(no M fit)-----3m (4441 or 4531)

 

With 2Nt a la SCANIAN, 2C followed by 3 something to show D GF and 3m available at the 3 level i should be able to show both minors and C GF hands.

 

Ill sacrifice the 3C Soff wich is an insignificant loss in my book.

 

 

 

There is 2 thing im not sure...

 

first is

Is

1Nt----2D

2H-----2S

 

could be INV with 4/5H+ 4S

or should be GF (im leaning toward GF)

 

second

 

1NT-----2S = inv with 4S

1NT-----2C----2red------2S = inv with 5 or + S

 

or

 

1NT-----2S gadget..

1NT-----2C------2R------2S = inv with 4-5 S (Keri style)

and to have to show a 6-7 card suit S inv at the 3.

 

It seems like a huge loss of space to have 2S just to show INV with 4S but since i have enough space for the minors maybe its worth it.

[straube]

I don't think 1N-2S (4 cards, GI) can be right.

 

My structure....

 

2C...stayman promising a major

.....2D-none

..........2H-majors, p/c

..........2S-GI 5 spades

..........2N-GI (could be 4S/5H with bad hearts)

..........3C-puppets 3D to show various 4M/5m patterns

..........3D-4S/5H GI

..........3H-4-1-3-5 or 4-1-2-6 slammish

..........3S-1-4-3-5 or 1-4-2-6 slammish

..........3N-likely both majors

..........4C-4-2-1-6

..........4D-2-4-1-6

.....2H-four hearts

..........2S-GI 5 spades

..........2N-GI 4 spades

..........3C-puppets to 3D to show 4 spades and unspecified shortness

..........3D-size ask with heart fit

..........3H-4-1-3-5 or 4-1-2-6

..........3S-4-3-1-5 or 4-2-1-6

..........3N-spade splinter!

..........4m-splinter

.....2S-four spades

..........similar to hearts

 

2D...transfer, 5 cards

......2S-GI, artificial

......2N-GF with a minor.

...........3C-no heart fit

.................3D-short spade

.................3H-3-5-4-1

.................3S-3-5-1-4

.................3N-no shortness or not slamming

.................4C-2-6-4-1

.................4D-2-6-1-4

...........etc. with heart fit

.....3C-GF, 4 spades

..........3D-no fit, asks shortness

.................3H-4-5-3-1

.................3S-4-5-1-3

.................3N-no shortness or not slamming

......3D-5 clubs

......3H-5 diamonds

......3S-self splinter

......3N-true COG (likely 5H332)

......4m-self splinter

 

2H-transfer

......2N-GF with a minor

......3C-GF with four hearts

......3D-GI+ with 5/5 in the majors

......3H-five clubs

......3S-five diamonds

 

2S-size ask

......2N-weak

......3C-strong

...........P-club bust

...........3D-short club, 3+M and 4+D

.................suits are bid up the line until a fit is found

...........3H-club slam try

...........3S-balanced slam try, relays for opener's shape

 

2N-puppet stayman, usually not slammish

......3C-not 4333

..........3D-four hearts

..........3H-four spade

..........3S-1-3-(54)

......3D-unspecified 4333

...........3H-four spades

...........3S-four hearts

......3M-5 of major

 

3C-transfer

......3H-diamond slam try

......3S-5/5 minors

......4L-can be used to show 6m4m21s

 

3D-short diamonds, 3+M and 4+C

.....suits bid up the line until a fit is found

 

3H-short hearts, 3+S and 4+m

.....3S-shows 4S

.....4S-shows 5S

 

3S-short spades, 4H and 4+m

 

just about any time responder has shown shortness before 3N, a bid of 4C by either partner announces that a fit has been found and strongly invites slam. So 1N-3H, 4C-4D, 5C would show that opener is strongly interest in a club slam.

 

Gerber and Texas

 

General rule....showing shortness shows interest in at least the 5-level.

.

[fromageGB]

I very much like the idea of finding the fit at 2M and passing, knowing it is invitational. Very useful even if not wide ranging NT. This is why in one partnership we have given up the 1NT open (in a constructive way - we play a mini which is primarily destructive) as we can with our transfer Walsh treatment find all lengths major fits and stop at 2M with game invitation declined. If it was possible to iron out this set of NT responses it would be very good.

 

However, you need to solve the inv 44xx and 45xx hands, and it's just not possible, I feel, from a 1NT open, as there is no room to show all invitational hand types without recourse to the 3 level in some instances.

 

With another partnership sans mini we restrict 1NT to 15-16 and then the consequences of a declined invitation at the 3 level are not so bad.

[benlessard]

If you like to play mini than i suggest you to play 10-14. Wich most think its impossible to play but they are 100% wrong. It has given us excellent results.

 

2C------2D

2M is 4M inv

 

2D is multi inv. (5M or + or no M)

 

you need all the 3 level for GF hands however because there is no GF stayman nor transfers. Ill check in my last post and post the complete stuff.

[awm]

It seems like a mild improvement to play:

 

1NT - 2♠ = five spade invite

1NT-2♣-2♦/2♥-2♠ = four spade invite

 

The main advantage here is that you now have a sequence for 4-4 in the majors which will never miss a major fit and can play a declined invite at the two-level. It becomes harder to bid the 5♠-4♥ invite, but this is less frequent.

 

The methods described are optimized well for invitational hands but will have some issues on weak hands (no garbage stayman, no club signoff) and slam hands (no way to relay opener's shape with two balanced hands).

[benlessard]

It seems like a mild improvement to play:

 

1NT - 2♠ = five spade invite

1NT-2♣-2♦/2♥-2♠ = four spade invite

 

The main advantage here is that you now have a sequence for 4-4 in the majors which will never miss a major fit and can play a declined invite at the two-level. It becomes harder to bid the 5♠-4♥ invite, but this is less frequent.

Agree 100% Good idea thanks a lot !

 

but will have some issues on weak hands (no garbage stayman, no club signoff) and slam hands (no way to relay opener's shape with two balanced hands).

 

Playing the weak NT garbage stayman is not that really useful, imo its marginally better if you can runout before they X you but its no big deal. Plus the D transfer that allow you to play 2D (available at least 80%) is clearly more frequent and useful than GS (not close at all).

 

Same thing for the club soff i dont remember last time it was necessary. Either they bid before you or your club suit inst good enough and you wait for the X and run to 2C. A direct 3C soff would have a preemptive effect but a delayed soff is not really preemptive enough to my taste.

 

As for 2 balanced hand I dont see where we would be at disadvantage compared to regular stayman. If responder has 4M he can transfers in the M and we will be in a better shape because both 2S and 2NT are forcing

 

1Nt-------2C (reg stayman)

2H--------???

 

vs..

 

1Nt-------2D(transfers)

2H--------2S and 2Nt is forcing (3 level will show 5H)

 

 

 

If responder doesnt have M.

 

1Nt--------???

 

2Nt and + are GF denies 6D or 4M.

 

So clubs hands and (31)54 and big bal hands are there.

 

 

Those who have a complex method based on 2way stayman are probably in a better shape but im not really worried about it relaying balanced hands vs balanced hands is often a dubious proposition anyway.

[woefuwabit]

This was a system I played. It is pretty accurate and we will always stop at the 2nd level with the correct major fit (which may be 4-3 in one case) when opener is minimum and responder is inviting with a 4 or 5 card major. 6 card majors and 5-5 major invites will be resolved at the 3rd level.

 

Note that this system was designed to be used with a system that NEVER opens 1NT with 4-4 in majors. If you do use this with a 4-4 major 1NT opening, you will likely end up playing a 4-4 ♥ when a 5-4 ♠ is available.

 

After 1NT -

2♣ - Game Invite, or minimum GF hand that doesn't wish to use relays

2♦ - Non-minimal Game Force - Begins Relay

2♥/2♠ - To play

2NT - Transfer to 3♣, Pass or Correct to 3♦

3♣/3♦ - Invitation 6 cards

3♥/3♠ - 5-5 majors GI/GF

 

After 1NT - 2♣

2♦ - Min, denies 4 ♥s, possible 4 ♠s + 3 ♥s

2♥ - Min, 4 ♥s

2♠ - Min, 4 ♠s + 2 ♥s

2NT - Max and not 4333 - 3♣ is stayman

3♣ - Max and 4333 - 3♦ is stayman

 

After 1NT - 2♣ - 2♦/♥/♠

2♥ - 5 ♥s, to play

2♠ - 4-5 ♠, correct to 2NT with doubleton

2NT - to play

3♣ - 5 ♥s GF (and possibly 4♠s)

3♦ - 4 ♠s GF

3♥ - 6 cards invitation (or 5 if raising 2♥)

3♠ - 6 cards invitation (or 5 if raising 2♠)

 

The key is in the 2♠ response to 2♣ denying 3 ♥s which ensures that responder inviting with 5 card ♥s can still stop at 2♥s with a 5-3 fit

[straube]

The principle advantage of your structure seems to be staying at 2-major opposite an invitational hand when opener is minimum. It does that very nicely, but I think the cost is too great.

 

1. transfers aren't used. Responder winds up playing H,S, and D contracts. Not

only that, but drop dead bids don't lead to further sequences and this seems a loss.

 

2. the wrong hand is being relayed. Its so much better for a distributional hand (responder's potentially) than for a balanced hand to be relayed.

 

There's other smaller tradeoffs (wins and losses). This structure seems like it would be playable with weak no trumps, but not strong no trumps.

[woefuwabit]

Of course, I played this structure in the context of a moscito (2001) system which opened 11(+) - 14 1NT. It would definitely be nice for responder to relay out distributional hands, but the cheapest way to do that would be:

 

1NT - 2♣ = Good game force, please bid 2♦ so that I can begin relays

2♦ - 2♥+ = Symmetric relays on a +5 track

 

Which is way too high to begin symmetric relay.

 

We were considering using Keri, which allows stopping in 2 of a major in many cases (but had problems stopping at 2 level with 4-4 or 5-4 in the majors, unlike my structure), and handled the distributional hands pretty well, but not balanced slam tries when the fit is in the minor (which is easily handled using relays).

 

I suppose there are always going to be tradeoffs here and there. Let's see if anyone can come out with a structure that allows minimum opener to stop at 2 opposite an invitation, responder to show unbalanced with slam interest, and balanced responders to ask opener about exact shape and strength

[fromageGB]

Let's see if anyone can come out with a structure that allows minimum opener to stop at 2 opposite an invitation

It's impossible.

 

Look at the heart suit. Responder may have a 5 card or a 4 card heart suit.

 

Assume opener responds to the 2♣ with 2♦ meaning "something". If responder bids 2♥ to show a 4+ card heart suit, opener will move on with 3 (if "something" includes 3) and then responder if he had 5 hearts is stuck. If 2H♥ by responder guarantees 5, then opener cannot have 4, or you miss your 4/4 fit. So for the 2♥ bid to work, opener must be either denying 3, or denying 4 hearts.

 

If opener is denying one or the other, then he has to respond to 2♣ with 2♥ with all hands with 4 (say) (or all hands with 3 of course). So the spades are unknown. They could be 2, 3, or 4 in length. There is now no way for responder find a spade fit.

 

QED

 

Of course, it is trivial if you exclude responder holdings of 5 of a major from the 2♣ response, but that defeats the object, as you cannot show 55xx, 35xx, 45xx and 54xx with a 2♦ bid and stop in 2♥ when it is correct !

[woefuwabit]

It's possible, if you can accept playing the occasional 4-3 fit.

This is the basis of the Keri over 1NT structure. Keri, however had problems when responder has 4-4 or 5-4 majors, a problem which the simple structure solves:

 

1NT - 2♣

2♦ = min, denies 4 card ♥s

2♥ = min, 4 card ♥s -> 2♠ = invite with 4-5 ♠s

 

1NT - 2♣ - 2♦

2♥ = 5 card ♥s

2♠ = 4-5 card ♠s

 

This solves all the problems with responder having 4-4 or 5-4 in majors

In the case of 4=4 or 5=4, responder passes a 2♥ response and bid 2♠ over a 2♦ response

In the case of 4=5, responder passes a 2♥ response or bids 2♥ over 2♦ and opener corrects to 2♠ or 2NT with doubleton ♥s

[woefuwabit]

I thought about it further and I think it may be possible to incorporate relays with the low-stop invitations and allowing opener to show unbalanced hands using transfer.

 

The key here is to move the relay start bid to 2♠. With my stringent 1NT opening (no 4-4 majors, no 5 card majors), there are a total of 20 hands (10x 4432, 4x 4333, 6x 5332), which can be relayed up to the 4♣ level, allowing the use of 4♦ terminator.

 

Single suited hands strong GF hands are now bid through Walsh relay (not available under Keri because the sequence shows invitation with both majors). So 1NT - 2♦ - 2♥ - 2♠ - 2NT - 3x = Single suited strong hand

 

As in Keri, 5M-5m hands are shown using transfer followed by 3m, and 5M-4m hands are shown using transfer followed by 2NT. I need to think about how to show 4M-5m and 2 suited minor hands though. There may be enough space if I use 2♠ response to 2♣ to show all maximum openings. The previous meaning of 2♠ can be rolled into 2♦ without problems.

 

Showing a 2 suited hand 5-4 hand should imply 5431. 5422 hands should probably ask opener to relay out the hand.

[benlessard]

Let's see if anyone can come out with a structure that allows minimum opener to stop at 2 opposite an invitation

 

There is at least 3 ways.

 

One is to use 2D as a game try with a long M.

 

2C-----2D

2M is inv with 4.

 

1Nt------2D is inv with 5/6 in M or no M. You dont have transfers here. Wich is a big drawback since you dont have a forcing stayman.

 

The 2nd is a bit like ive done. Partner respond 2M to 2C only if hes minmum. So that alll minimum hands and 4-4 fit are found and you stop at 2M, however responder 54-45 cannot be showned.

 

The 3rd wya is Keri style with 4/5 inv. IMO it doesnt really work.

[fromageGB]

It's possible, if you can accept playing the occasional 4-3 fit.

True, and this may not be a bad thing (see "simulation question" thread in the general section). However, there is also imprecision with responder's suit being perhaps 4 or perhaps 5, and if my partner shows a 5 card major invitational hand when I open a NT, I would like to bid game with 4 card support, even if minimum. (But just a 3 point range.) You don't have that problem with classical methods. It's a big loss for the advantage of being able to play in 2M, especially when it could be a 4/3 fit when it is no benefit.

[woefuwabit]

It's possible, if you can accept playing the occasional 4-3 fit.

True, and this may not be a bad thing (see "simulation question" thread in the general section). However, there is also imprecision with responder's suit being perhaps 4 or perhaps 5, and if my partner shows a 5 card major invitational hand when I open a NT, I would like to bid game with 4 card support, even if minimum. (But just a 3 point range.) You don't have that problem with classical methods. It's a big loss for the advantage of being able to play in 2M, especially when it could be a 4/3 fit when it is no benefit.

Erm.. both Keri and my structure allows for that.

In Keri and my structure, after 1NT - 2♣ - 2♦ - 2♥/2♠, 3♣ is bid with minimum and good 4 card support with a doubleton.

Also for my structure responder with 5 ♥s can reinvite with 3♥ if opener responds 2♥ after 1NT - 2♣

[straube]

woefuwabit, I invite you to look at my previously posted structure. My aim was not to stop in 2M with the invitational hands but to provide methods for responder to show shape before (the large majority of the time) 3N has been reached.

 

If responder has a balanced hand, he starts with 2S (size ask) and then asks opener to relay his hand starting with a second relay of 3S. Yes, that's high, but 2S at least accomplished narrowing opener's hand strength and responder is usually set on slam or not at that point.

 

Anyway, it has a method to bid any 5431 or 4441 or 5/5 hand before 3N. Klinger (inventer of Keri) wasn't able to do that. For instance, if he has 4-1-3-5 he has responder bid 2N (transfers to clubs) and then rebid 3S. this shows only the clubs and spades and not the shortness. He also can't show the full pattern for a GF hand that is 5M4M31.

 

Btw, I think that playing in Moysian's when the balanced hand has the fragment is dubious. Responder often will not have a good 4-card suit and opener will often not having a ruffing value. Klinger's example hands were usually biased favorable to his methods.

[woefuwabit]

Considering that the structure was part of a Moscito system, playing Moysian at 2nd level isn't so much a choice, but a fact of life :) You have to look at Moysian as an acceptable place to contract to play in, not a desired contract to play in. Playing the occasional Moysian is just a trade-off for the efficiency in the rest of the structure, and whether it is a worthwhile price to pay is subjective.

 

However, I believe my structure is a significant improvement over Keri when it comes to handling the hands with responder 4-4 and 5-4 majors and stopping at the 2 level. Furthermore, my structure is guaranteed not stop at 2♥ with a Moysian fit. Moysian fits for 2♠ are still possible. Not perfectly optimal, but still a significant improvement over Keri.

 

I've looked at your structure and I think I can try to incorporate some of the unbalanced hand showing ideas into my structure, although I may not have as much bidding space to show them as you do. I have some doubts about parts of your structure though, for example, how do you deal with responder inviting with 4♠s + 5♥s, when opener has a minimum hand with 3♠s + 2♥s? Looks like you have to choose between playing a 5-2 or 4-3 fit at the 3rd level, or bid 3NT and hope for the best.

[straube]

Thanks for your thoughts. I do think your structure is an improvement over Keri. The only drawback I can see is the loss of being able to play 2D and that's very small.

 

As to your concern for my structure, opener would never choose 3N with a minimum and 3S/2H. He'll just accept the transfer to 3H because responder will either have 6 hearts or 5 hearts that are strong enough for him to choose a 3H contract. With a poor heart suit and 4S/5H, responder will rebid 2N. I admit that's not the selling point of my structure. However, a common standard treatment goes 1N-2D, 2H-2S which shows 5H/4S GI; now opener can choose between 2N and 3H (knowing when a 5/3 heart fit exists), but he certainly can't play 2H.

 

My structure is about getting to the right game and slam. Btw, I heard from Klinger that he no longer bothers to show invitational hands with a minor. I.e. 1N-2C, 2D-3m is not a 6-card suit GI. He thinks it just isn't worth it.

[fromageGB]

However, there is also imprecision with responder's suit being perhaps 4 or perhaps 5, and if my partner shows a 5 card major invitational hand when I open a NT, I would like to bid game with 4 card support, even if minimum.

Erm.. both Keri and my structure allows for that.

In Keri and my structure, after 1NT - 2♣ - 2♦ - 2♥/2♠, 3♣ is bid with minimum and good 4 card support with a doubleton.

I was thinking of the sequence 1NT 2♣ 2♦ 2♠ (4 card or 5 card). Now a minimum opener bidding 3♣ could be too much on a 4/4 fit. But I suppose nothing's perfect, and it's a price you are happy to pay. The outside doubleton does help, though.