inv+ jacoby?

[bluecalm]

Btw as to puppet discussion. I have just found out (by reading their cc) that MR play the version of puppet which hides opener shape:

 

2NT - 3♣

3♦ any without 5M

and following:

3♥ = 4spades or none

3♠ = 4 hearts

3NT = 4-4 in majors

 

2NT - 3♦

3♥ - 3♠ = any 5-4/5-5/4-5 in majors

 

This version could be even better for camouflage purposes than normal stayman as defenders often don't know anything about declarer 4card majors (if resp have at least on 4M) if it ends up in 3NT.

I must say I like this idea a lot.

[jallerton]

Btw as to puppet discussion. I have just found out (by reading their cc) that MR play the version of puppet which hides opener shape:

 

2NT - 3♣

3♦ any without 5M

and following:

3♥ = 4spades or none

3♠ = 4 hearts

3NT = 4-4 in majors

 

2NT - 3♦

3♥ - 3♠ = any 5-4/5-5/4-5 in majors

 

This version could be even better for camouflage purposes than normal stayman as defenders often don't know anything about declarer 4card majors (if resp have at least on 4M) if it ends up in 3NT.

I must say I like this idea a lot.

 

Compared with 3♣ 4-card Stayman, this method of bidding over 3♣ will sometimes give away less information, but sometimes more. If Responder is merely seeking a 5-card major opposite and Opener holds 4 spades, that information is given away in the sequence 2NT-3♣-3♦-3♥-3♠-3NT. 4th hand gains the ability to double an extra conventional call too.

 

However, I am more concerned that you "like a lot" the idea of 2NT-3♦-3♥-3♠ as "any 5-4/5-5/4-5 in majors". Unless their 2NT opening guarantees 3 cards in each major, or they prefer to play seven card fits in 4major to 3NT, they are going to struggle always getting to the normal game contract after this start.

[bluecalm]

I still like normal stayman more but this version seems better than stuff when you give away opener shape on every hand.

[dake50]

With these 2NT structures, would splinters be needed?

If more than game - here's my short to help evaluate tricks/duplication.

Wouldn't the splinter hand just best-guess game/not.

Surely splinters on top of this 2NT structure can be very narrowly defined.

[gnasher]

I still like normal stayman more but this version seems better than stuff when you give away opener shape on every hand.

 

If you don't care about finding a 5-card major in opener's hand, these methods give away nothing about opener's hand, always rightside any game, and don't risk reaching any silly contracts:

 

3C = both majors (opener responds to Stayman, then over 3D responder bids Smolen)

3D = 4+ hearts

3D-3H-3S = only 4 hearts

3D-3H-other = 5+ hearts

3H = 5 spades

3S = raise to 3NT

3NT = 4 spades, choice of games

 

The main disadvantage is that you give them a few extra chances to double artificial bids.

[jallerton]

Another (perhaps more serious) disadvantage of that method, Andy, is that you only have the 3♠ puppet and 4-level responses to cover both all minor suit slam tries and all slam tries with 4 spades, not 4 hearts.

 

I suspect you'd be better off putting the slam tries with 4 spades through your otherwise underused 3♣ bid.

[gnasher]

I suspect you'd be better off putting the slam tries with 4 spades through your otherwise underused 3♣ bid.

 

Yes, we do exactly that:

2NT-3♣;3♦-4m = 4 spades and four of the minor

2NT-3♣;3♥-4m = 4 spades and four of the minor

2NT-3♣;3♥-3♠ = slam try with hearts agreed

 

I didn't mention that part of it (and one or two other twiddly bits) because I was trying to convey the essence of the method, without going into lots of detail.

 

By the way, the reason that we do this is that you made exactly the same suggestion to me three years ago. :)

[MrAce]

Yes, we do exactly that:

2NT-3♣;3♦-4m = 4 spades and four of the minor

2NT-3♣;3♥-4m = 4 spades and four of the minor

2NT-3♣;3♥-3♠ = slam try with hearts agreed

 

I didn't mention that part of it (and one or two other twiddly bits) because I was trying to convey the essence of the method, without going into lots of detail.

 

By the way, the reason that we do this is that you made exactly the same suggestion to me three years ago. :)

 

Andy, would you mind sending me all the details of this via email ? If you will turkofla@hotmail.com. Thanks in adv regardless u send or not :) I didn't wanna hijack the thread.

[gnasher]

I didn't wanna hijack the thread.

 

It's a bit late to worry about that.

 

I've emailed you the details.

[MrAce]

It's a bit late to worry about that.

 

I've emailed you the details.

 

Heh, i hear ya. Thanks m8 :)

[MrAce]

Double post

[Poky]

is there a better way to do it specifically for inv+ jacoby?

Yes, there is.

 

Your 'Swedish' structure has many leaks:

1. The cheapest rebid is showing the worst hands,

2. It's asymmetric with a profitable structure when we overcall,

3. Doesn't polarize between weak balanced/unbalanced hands without revealing the shortness.

 

What do I mean?

1. The 3C rebid spares most space and should be used to show the best hands,

2. Do you really want to bid 3C to show a minimal hand after, say:

(1C) 1S (pass) 2NT

(Dbl) ?

3. Sometimes (and pretty often, I would say) responder has a hand that wants to play game if partner is minimal but unbalanced, without knowing which shortness opener has (to make opponents harder to find the best lead/defence)

 

All that said, a much better structure should be:

3C = any 17+ (...3D asking, new suit showing shortness, 3M showing 10-11 balanced)

3D = minimal unablanced (...3M/4M to play, step1 asking shortness)

3M = minimal balanced (...3NT to play, cuebid trying for slam)

3oM/4C/4D = shortness, 14-16

3NT = balanced 14-16 with 5M

4M = 6M(322), 14-16

 

After 3C 17+, 3D relays into the same structure, with one addition:

3M = 6M(322)

3NT = balanced with 5M

 

And besides all, it is very intuitive, easy to remember and use.