Responding to 1nt

[1axbycz1]

Hi, I have learnt the basic responses to a 1nt opening. What i learnt so far-

2c: stayman

2d/2h: transfer to 2h/2s

2s: forcing to 3c, responder bids 3d/pass

2nt: invitation bid, opener replies 2nt/3nt

3c/3d: showing long minor, opener pass/3nt.

3nt: signoff

4c: gerber, asks for aces

4nt: invitational to 6nt

5nt: 6nt with minimum, 7nt with maximum

6/7nt: signoff

 

Any suggestions as for how to use 3h/3s as well as the 4-level bids? Could these bids be used to investigate slam in minors? With slam hands in majors I would normally transfer and make a jump-bid (1n-2d-2h-3s) to show slam interest. With balanced slam hands i just play in NT. However, I have some doubts about this too. Can the 2s and 2nt bids be swapped? Afterall, the 2nt is "wasted" in the 1nt-2s-3c relay bid. Can 2nt be used to signoff and 2s be used for invitation (2nt with min, 3nt with max)? For example, if I have 16 points balanced hand (i play 15-17 1nt) and partner opens 1nt. I will have to invite 4nt. if I use 2s and partner replies 2nt showing minimum, i get to signoff in 3nt instead of 4nt.

My partner suggested using other sequences to investigate slam in minors, such as using 2c stayman and replying 3c/3d to any bid (2d/2h/2s) i make. another possible one could be 2s (pretending to signoff in 3c/3d)-3c-3h/3s, while signoffs in 3c and 3d are still allowed.

Are these actually feasible? I want to ask this, because my current bidding system is pretty good for bidding slam in majors, but not the minors. Bidding 5c/5d is a very low priority especially when partner is balanced, but what about 6c/6d?

However, when coming to slams, I feel that I need a way to bid such hands, and the direct 6c/6d bids do not look good to me as i tried it when lacking 2 aces and got down. Gerber 4c may come into the rescue, but I cannot sign off in 5c! Then what about 5-4-4-0 hands? NT doesnt look good, but I cannot just insist on my 5-card suit, in case partner has only 2.

[fuburules3]

The most common use of 4D/4H is as transfers to 4H and 4S respectively. If responder rebids after this, it shows strong slam interest.

 

A simple use of 3H/3S is as 55 in majors, invitational and game forcing respectively.

 

I think bidding stayman and then bidding 3 of a minor to show slam interest is fairly "normal."

 

As a relatively new player myself, I have found doing this (and not much more) works well enough most of the time.

[bluecalm]

Good use of 1NT - 3M is to show shortness and 5+-4+ minors (at least GF hand)

Such hands are very difficult to bid without this convention.

Say if you have:

 

Axx

x

KJTxx

Kxxx

 

You bid 3♥ and partner will see what to do with:

 

KQx

xxx

AQx

Axxx

 

or:

 

xxx

KQx

AQx

Axxx

 

If you have something like:

KJxx

x

AQxxx

Kxx

 

You start with stayman as usual. Those bids aren't made with 4M.

This is useful and "expert standard" in a sense that good partnerships have some kind of way to show those hands (not always by jumping to 3M though).

 

As to jumps to 4♦/♥ they are often used as transfers. This gives you a way to jump fast to game and give away too much information.

 

System you described seems to be quite good to me. It's simple and cater for all basic hand types except maybe slam tries with long minor.

There are many ways to play those but I think it's not something for b/i partnership.

[gwnn]

You should change it to:

 

1NT-

 

2♣=stayman, could have 8-9 balanced with no 4 card major

2♦/♥=transfers

2♠=clubs, any strength

2NT=diamonds, any strength

 

Now you have the whole 3 level for yourself. A very simple structure that is also fun to play is

 

3♣=both minors (5-5), weak (opener passes or corrects to 3♦)

3♦=both minors, strong

3♥/♠=3 cards here, 54 either way in the minors

3NT=sign-off

4♣=hearts, opener should complete or bid 4♦ with a super good hand for hearts

4♦=spades, as above

4♥/♠=sign off. Usually used when you have a surprising shape and you would rather they don't know it.

[bluecalm]

I don't like Gwnn's structure at all.

I played this way for some time and it has following disadvantages:

 

1)

Bidding invitations by stayman gives them all the chances in the world to double for lead and gives away too much information (you tell them about 4M's before lead while this information is not useful at all to you).

 

2)

3♦ is complete waste of bid. Just bid 3M indicating shortness with those hands. This is the most important information for partner when assessing combined potential of hands anyway

 

 

I think structure you described is decent and much better than this.

If I were to propose my pet structure it would go:

 

2♠ = clubs

2NT = natural

3♣ = diamonds weak or GF+

3♦ = invite with diamonds

3♥/♠ = shortness

 

After transferring to minor you can bid 3M indicating shortness and slam try in your minor.

The structure you choose depends a lot if you open most 5M-3-3-2 hands with 1NT. This is advanced stuff though and I think you should settle for simple system (like the one you described in OP for example).

[Cyberyeti]

An alternative is to expand the 2♠ response to deal with the minor 2 suiters.

 

Opener responds 2N (default), 3♣ showing 4♦, 3♦ showing 5♣.

 

Over 2N, you bid 3m with a weak hand with that minor, or bid 3♥ with at least 5-4 minors and longer clubs, 3♠ at least 5-4 minors with longer ♦, 3N at least 5-5 NF, 4N at least 5-5 forcing. The 3M bids show at least some slam interest.

 

We do not use 4 level red suit transfers, but use 1N-4♦ as 5-5 majors either to play or slamgoing, with the in between hands handled via 1N-2♥-2♠-3♥-3N-4♥.

[bluecalm]

Over 2N, you bid 3m with a weak hand with that minor, or bid 3♥ with at least 5-4 minors and longer clubs, 3♠ at least 5-4 minors with longer ♦

 

This is bad.

The most important information if you have 5+-4+ minors is where your shortness is. How long minors are isn't tha valuable of information.

The number one task is to assess if 3NT is better than 5m.

There are also other hand types which should take priority like 6m, GF and major shortness.

 

OP presented quite a decent simple structure. What you propose is complicated and has many obvious shortcomings.

[gwnn]

2)

3♦ is complete waste of bid. Just bid 3M indicating shortness with those hands. This is the most important information for partner when assessing combined potential of hands anyway

No, partner should know if you have 3 cards in a major.

 

You could want to play in a 4-3 or 5-3 in a major fit.

 

I agree about 2♣ with a balanced hand is not so good, but it's not so bad as you're saying. Anyway, usually you should try to avoid to invite with balanced hands anyway.

[karlson]

What gwnn describes is close to standard in many parts of the US (except 1N-3c), and I think it works pretty well and is easy to learn.

 

I would add that one of the most important slam investigation tools is showing shortness, and most people play that after a transfer to a minor suit and acceptance (1n-2s-2n/3c(*) or 1n-2n-3c/3d) responder's 3M bid shows a singleton. This can help opener decide not only whether to prefer 5m to 3n with a minimum but little strength opposite responder's shortness, but also to investigate slam with such a hand and a maximum.

 

* You should decide which of the two steps allowed by the minor suit transfer shows the "accept" (i.e. a hand you would have bid 3n over 3m on in your old structure) and which the "reject". As far as I can tell, it's about a 50/50 split of people playing it both ways.

[karlson]

By the way it seems to me that you're missing some basic pieces of followup bidding to stayman and transfers. With your 5440 example, if the 5 is a major, you could transfer and then bid one of your 4 card suits (natural game forcing). You should in fact do this with any 5-5 or 5-4 that looks like it might want to play in your other suit if that's the best fit. It also might help you find out if 3n is not a good spot despite no major suit fit.

 

If the 5 is a minor, you can accompish the same thing by starting with stayman to look for the 4-4 major fit, and not finding it, continue with 3 of your minor (again, natural and game forcing).

[karlson]

Over 2N, you bid 3m with a weak hand with that minor, or bid 3♥ with at least 5-4 minors and longer clubs, 3♠ at least 5-4 minors with longer ♦

 

This is bad.

The most important information if you have 5+-4+ minors is where your shortness is. How long minors are isn't tha valuable of information.

The number one task is to assess if 3NT is better than 5m.

There are also other hand types which should take priority like 6m, GF and major shortness.

 

OP presented quite a decent simple structure. What you propose is complicated and has many obvious shortcomings.

Hm, what would han say gnasher would say in this situation?

 

Might it be possible to find out responder's shortness below 3nt?

[Flameous]

I play that 2♠ is a minor suit stayman, partner bids 2NT with better ♦s and 3♣ with better clubs. Now responder can sign off in either minor or bid 3M as a shortness. Note that we use this same bid with slammish hands that have both minors or long minor. Following 4 minor bid from responder agrees on trumps.

 

I play 3M as invitational with long major. (Transfer and major rebid is slammish without shortness)

 

Some of the greatest players also use 2♠ like you suggested as a size ask. You answer 2NT with min, 3♣ with max. Now responder can bid 3m to sign off, or show any slammish hands as you like. It also frees 4NT which you can use for 55+ minor hands, either slammish or even pre-emptive.

 

Also gonna advertise this a bit :) http://www.jackbridge.com/pdf/eheeman.pdf

[bluecalm]

Might it be possible to find out responder's shortness below 3nt?

 

Obviously not here:

 

3♠ at least 5-4 minors with longer ♦

 

As we are at 3♠ level already.

 

Btw, I think what Gwnn's presented is not that bad at all.

Most important hand types are biddable and you have 3m bids free for use of your choice.

I just don't like invitation being in stayman and his choice of 3m bids.

[karlson]

Ahh, my bad, I misread and thought you were still bashing gwnn's structure (1n-3d in this case).

[Cyberyeti]

Over 2N, you bid 3m with a weak hand with that minor, or bid 3♥ with at least 5-4 minors and longer clubs, 3♠ at least 5-4 minors with longer ♦

 

This is bad.

The most important information if you have 5+-4+ minors is where your shortness is. How long minors are isn't tha valuable of information.

The number one task is to assess if 3NT is better than 5m.

There are also other hand types which should take priority like 6m, GF and major shortness.

 

OP presented quite a decent simple structure. What you propose is complicated and has many obvious shortcomings.

You don't use these 5-4 bids unless you have ambitions beyond 3N, if you don't find what you want, you play 4N and expect to have plenty to make it. So yes you do find out about the shortages, but at the 4 level.

[bluecalm]

You don't use these 5-4 bids unless you have ambitions beyond 3N, if you don't find what you want, you play 4N and expect to have plenty to make it. So yes you do find out about the shortages, but at the 4 level.

 

So what do I do with:

 

Axx

x

KQxxx

QTxx

 

 

 

after 1NT ?

[mgoetze]

Axx

x

KQxxx

QTxx

 

 

 

after 1NT ?

3NT, WTP?

[bluecalm]

3NT, WTP?

 

Imo this awful. They auto lead majors after 1nt - 3nt and if hearts are running they will lead them in 90+% of cases.

I would rather give up stayman than bid 3nt with this hand.

[Cyberyeti]

3NT, WTP?

 

Imo this awful. They auto lead majors after 1nt - 3nt and if hearts are running they will lead them in 90+% of cases.

I would rather give up stayman than bid 3nt with this hand.

So when partner has his usual 4423 hand you'll play 3N having pinpointed dummy's singleton heart so the man can lead the suit when his partner has 5, brilliant.

 

Opposite a weak no trump I'd bid 3N, opposite a strong no trump I'd follow the 2♠ sequence.

[bluecalm]

So when partner has his usual 4423 hand you'll play 3N having pinpointed dummy's singleton heart so the man can lead the suit when his partner has 5, brilliant.

 

In fact this is quite smart. Brilliant is too much to say about this.

Gains from playing right game (5m if opener has xxx/Axx) are more frequent than loses by pinpointing heart lead which wouldn't otherwise be made.

I know that because I went through enough simulated hands to form an opinion but this is honestly quite obvious.

If you go through 2♠ with this hand you gain nothing. Opener will still be unable to realize when 3NT is better than 5m because he will only know which minor suit of yours is longer, this information doesn't influence his game decision almost at all.

 

If my opinion isn't enough for you you may look at what elite players play.

There is a reason this is one of the very few treatments almost all elite partnership use (some of them bid fragment instead of shortness as gwnn suggested).

Here is short list:

 

Fantoni - Nunes

Meckwell (they show shortnes while 5-5, with (3-1)-(5-4) they go through puppet stayman which is 2NT in their system and then show shortness.

Sementa Duboin

Zia Hamman

Balicki Zmudzinski

Garner - Weinstein (when it existed)

Cohen - Berkowitz (when it existed)

Helgemo - Helness

 

Besides stayman, transfer and t/o double you will be hard pressed to find any other convention which is that popular at elite level...

[mgoetze]

3NT, WTP?

 

Imo this awful. They auto lead majors after 1nt - 3nt and if hearts are running they will lead them in 90+% of cases.

I would rather give up stayman than bid 3nt with this hand.

I'm not disagreeing with the 3♥/3♠ convention, I play it myself. But what's the win to using it on this hand? You want partner to give up 3NT when he's weak in hearts... OK great. Then what? Play 5♦ in a 4-3 fit on a combined 26 HCP?

 

Add another king and we can talk. But if 5m rates to be just as bad as 3NT, then there is no reason to tell opps how to play the hand.

[fuburules3]

I've never played these bids of three of a major showing shortness (or a fragment), but am intrigued. In the past I've used these bids as 5/5 in majors invitational and 5/5 in majors gf. How do you show these hands if you play 3 of a majors shows shortness?

 

I usually play forcing smolen and reserve transfer to hearts followed by 2 spades as a relay to show a slam try and long suit.

[the hog]

This is one time when I agree with Calm. We used to play Keri where 3C/D/H/S were all bids showing shortness with various s/ts or voids. The object is not to bid perfect slams but rather to avoid poor 3NT contracts. I agree that

Axx

x

KQxxx

QTxx'

is a s/t showing bid, and definitely not a 3NT what's the problem?

[bluecalm]

I'm not disagreeing with the 3♥/3♠ convention, I play it myself. But what's the win to using it on this hand?

 

-partner often has 4 card minor fit

-if he doesn't you can still play in 5-3 minor if you have intelligent follow ups (3M is forcing to game so you can't play in 4m)

-sometimes you get to play in spades 4-3 which may be decent contract; partner is welcome to bid 3♠ after 3♥ as natural.

 

How do you show these hands if you play 3 of a majors shows shortness?

 

There are many ways. Two of them are:

 

1)Use smolen, so:

 

2♣ - 2♦

3♥/3♠ shows 5-4 hands in majors gf

 

2♣ - 2♦

2♥ shows weak hand with both majors

 

2♣ - 2♥

2♠ - 3♥ shows gf hand with 5-5 majors (this is important because you want to be able to stop in 3NT opposite 2-2-(4-5)

 

Now there is invite missing. You have an option to not play invites with 5-4 majors or:

 

2♣ - 2♦

2♠ = invite with 5spades/4hearts

 

2♦ - 2♥

2♠= invite with 5hearts/4spades

 

This is close because there are other useful things you can do with two last sequences and invites with 5-4 are rare. Your choice.

 

2)use ask about 3card majors, then:

 

1NT - 2♣

2♦ - 3♦ = ask about 3 card major

 

You can show 3's naturally, bid 3NT with 2-2-(4-5) or 2-2-(3-6). With 3-3 majors you can either show hearts first or agree that bids above 3NT shows 3-3 majors and good/average/bad hand (4♣/4♦/4♥).

 

This has the advantage because you can use:

 

1NT - 2♣

2♦ - 3♥/3♠ as showing shortness ( (4-1)-3-5)/(4-1)-4-4) hands which is agani very useful.

 

If you play that way you need to play:

 

1NT - 2♣

2♦ - 3♣

 

as artificial ask, like in this thread: http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=41385 (see Mohitz's scheme)

 

 

I may also add as we are at it that after suit response to stayman:

 

1NT - 2♣

2♥/2♠

 

It's useful to play that other major (2♠/3♥) sets opener's major as trumps so you can explore slams/best game.

 

If you play this or you play like Gwnn's wrote (that stayman can be bid without 4M) then it's useful to play more responses to stayman:

 

1NT - 2♣

2NT/3♣ = 4-4 majors, min/max (then you use 3♦/3♥ as transfers and bid slam tries/games).

The reason for this is that you free other sequences which normally are used to show hands with other major (like 1NT - 2♣ - 2♥ - 2♠).

 

This is all quite complicated as gor B/I's so I think OP should settle for his own system for now. Just add the most important followups an 3M bids as showing shortness because those are really useful and quite frequent.

[Cyberyeti]

This is one time when I agree with Calm. We used to play Keri where 3C/D/H/S were all bids showing shortness with various s/ts or voids. The object is not to bid perfect slams but rather to avoid poor 3NT contracts. I agree that

Axx

x

KQxxx

QTxx'

is a s/t showing bid, and definitely not a 3NT what's the problem?

Calm hasn't indicated whether his hand was intended to be opposite a weak or a strong no trump. The problem with this method is there are plenty of hands like:

 

Kxx, Kxx, AJxx, Axx (take away J♦ if you want a weak no trump) where you find your fit, and play in a bad 5♦ instead of a good 3N. They lead a heart most of the time even when the ace is wrong against 3N but not against 5♦, and this is a non trivial consideration. If you think you'd be in 3N with the hand I give then partner will have Axx, Q, Qxxxx, KQxx where 5♦ is near laydown and 3N requires the diamond finesse or a 3-3 club break if you have the J♦, and a 3-3 club break if you don't.

 

Where you only have 25-26 points between the two hands, 11 tricks (and only 2 losers) can be a lot to ask with a 5431 opposite a balanced hand.

 

Certainly in the UK, you can be sure opposite a weak no trump, if you just bid 3N you'll be doing what most of the field will do (possibly transferring to ♦ first).

 

We use 1N-3M as the old fashioned forcing, suit setting with slam ambitions, so that partner starts cue bidding immediately with anything vaguely suitable.

 

We could use 1N-2♣-2♦-3M for this, but choose to use this looking for 4-4 minor suit fits on 4m4M/m32 type slamgoing hands.