Jump to content

Puppet Stayman sequence


Recommended Posts

Playing puppet stayman, we have the following sequence:

 

2N-3C (puppet)

3D (1+ 4 card major) - 3H (4+ Spades 3- hearts)

4X (cuebid in support of spades) - 4H ??

 

Is it a retransfer? Is it last train? Something else? Thanks for the thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Playing puppet stayman, we have the following sequence:

 

2N-3C (puppet)

3D (1+ 4 card major) - 3H (4+ Spades 3- hearts)

4X (cuebid in support of spades) - 4H ??

 

Is it a retransfer? Is it last train? Something else? Thanks for the thoughts.

 

Why not 3 over 3? I don't see much reason for this sequence to exist at all.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not 3 over 3? I don't see much reason for this sequence to exist at all.

 

Well, how about:

 

2N - 3C

3D - 3S

4C - 4D

 

Is this a cue (or last train) or a retransfer?

 

For that matter, what is 4C here? It's the only available cue that leaves room for a retransfer. Maybe it's (second-to-) last train, if 2N bidder has the right to bid such a thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a few options here. Simple is to play that 3NT denies 4 hearts, 4C shows 4 hearts and a good hand for slam, and 4H shows 4 hearts and not such a good hand for slam. Over 4C, 4D would then be a re-transfer, either to play in 4M or to ask for key cards. If you want to also check for a cashing AK out then you need to add some complexity and allow some wrong-siding. For example, over 3S you could play that 4D denies a club control while 4C shows one. Then, over 4C, 4D would be a re-transfer and 4H can deny a spade control while 4S would then show one. Another possibility for 4D (over 3S) is as a super-flag, that is a hand with alot of controls that suddenly looks huge. Really you just have to agree something with partner, preferably a scheme that fits within the mentality of other similar auctions in the system.
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Playing puppet stayman, we have the following sequence:

 

2N-3C (puppet)

3D (1+ 4 card major) - 3H (4+ Spades 3- hearts)

4X (cuebid in support of spades) - 4H ??

 

Is it a retransfer? Is it last train? Something else? Thanks for the thoughts.

 

 

 

Please, agree,this with your partner.....

As said, by other contributors, it can be anything.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My general rule:

 

If a re-transfer makes sense, it is a re-transfer.

 

If one-under is a re-transfer, not re-transferring (bidding the game yourself) is Last Train.

 

Thus, in the example, 4 would be a re-transfer, whereas 4 would be Last Train.

 

Sure, you grab captaincy on the Last Train hands, but this is rare and is less expensive if we are in slam zone.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't a retransfer when partner first offers a transfer and opener super accepts?, then he rebids in the same suit demanding opener completes the transfer.

 

1nt---2

2---3

 

Perhaps, this is just terminology, I play 4 as a demand to bid 4.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Normally opener bids 3 if he has support, so cuebidding should mean he doesn't want to play in himself. Therefore 4 should just be a cuebid/last train/...

 

For the record: 2NT-3-3-3-4-4 for me is a retransfer because opener had to cuebid with fit, he didn't have a choice.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Normally opener bids 3 if he has support, so cuebidding should mean he doesn't want to play in himself. Therefore 4 should just be a cuebid/last train/...

 

For the record: 2NT-3-3-3-4-4 for me is a retransfer because opener had to cuebid with fit, he didn't have a choice.

 

... And 4 is a (substitute for) "last train" , which means responder has some slam interest , but isn't willing to go to the 5 level.

All hands without any slam interest should retransfer with 4.

 

This also applies to the OP sequence : there 4H is a re-transfer , and 4S is a "last train".

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My general rule:

 

If a re-transfer makes sense, it is a re-transfer.

 

If one-under is a re-transfer, not re-transferring (bidding the game yourself) is Last Train.

 

Thus, in the example, 4 would be a re-transfer, whereas 4 would be Last Train.

 

Sure, you grab captaincy on the Last Train hands, but this is rare and is less expensive if we are in slam zone.

 

For sure, retransfer with last train being bidding game. Not perfect, but works well. In the example hand opener should always bid 3S though, this gives away no info and always rightsides leading to better auctions.

 

For 2N 3C 3D 3S, 4C should be all good hands for hearts (giving away no info about cuebidding and, allowing righsiding), and 4D retransfer over that, 4H last train.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Playing puppet stayman, we have the following sequence:

 

2N-3C (puppet)

3D (1+ 4 card major) - 3H (4+ Spades 3- hearts)

4X (cuebid in support of spades) - 4H ??

 

Is it a retransfer? Is it last train? Something else? Thanks for the thoughts.

IMHO, the key is the meaning of 4x.

 

Is there a reason to bypass 3? It could be - opener could have something as AKxx xxx AKx AKx, with no interest in declaring but wanting to protect a heart control in partner's hand. This seems the only logical way to play a cuebid in this sequence.

 

If so, retransfering is pointless. To me, 2NT-3; 3-3; 4-4 sounds like responder has a heart control but not a diamond control. [...]; 4-4 sounds more like LTTC, surely with a club control if playing Italian cuebids (hoping opener has AKxx AKx AKx xxx).

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, the 2NT opening I assume is a 2-point range. In the auction 2NT-3// 3-3, opener basically has 2 ways to show and still play from his side: 4 and 4. If 4 is a super-accept for within a 2-point range, shouldn't this be showing strong controls rather than just a max? Therefore, the last-train meaning for 4 over 4 is less useful. Or, is it better to play that 4 over 3 shows poor controls, and 4 shows willingness for slam but not necessarily a great hand?
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

 

Because it is very important to rightside when one side is so clearly going to be so much stronger than the other side.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My general rule:

 

If a re-transfer makes sense, it is a re-transfer.

 

If one-under is a re-transfer, not re-transferring (bidding the game yourself) is Last Train.

 

Thus, in the example, 4 would be a re-transfer, whereas 4 would be Last Train.

 

Sure, you grab captaincy on the Last Train hands, but this is rare and is less expensive if we are in slam zone.

 

This is an excellent meta-rule. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

[pedantry on]

I agree you shouldn't call it a retransfer. How can you re-do something you haven't done the first time?

[pedantry off]

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[pedantry on]

I agree you shouldn't call it a retransfer. How can you re-do something you haven't done the first time?

[pedantry off]

You could call 3 a transfer, which opener will accept only with fit. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:P I think it has to be a re-transfer. Consider that the only hand that has shown slam interest is the one that is limited, say, 20-21 HCP with no singletons or voids. Responder could have very little, and right-siding the spade contract is important. Or put it this way: if I were the 2NT opener, I would always bid 4.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...