showing a minor after transfer to major

[WGF_Flame]

Hi everyone.

1nt-2d

2h

 

1nt-15-17

2d- hearts

 

what is your opinion about hiding a minor second suit as responder and bidding 3nt instead ? will you ever hide a 5 card suit, 5431,5422 ?

 

thanks in advance

Sharon

[Trinidad]

It obviously depends somewhat on the form of scoring. That said, I will very often hide a 5 card minor to bid 3NT. If I show a minor, it is usually not out of fear for 3NT. It is at least a mild slam try. (But a control rich 11 HCP with a red 5-5 is enough for a mild slam try.)

 

Rik

[gnasher]

I'd never hide a five-card minor. With a 5422 or 5431, playing standard methods I nearly always show the second suit, because I expect my partner to pass 3NT much of the time that he has a 4333 shape.

 

I prefer to play methods where I have two ways to show five of a major and then bid 3NT: one of them says that partner can pass with a 4333, and one says that he can't. Playing those methods, I'm more likely to suppress the second suit.

 

I don't regard showing a second suit as a slam try of any sort. With QJ10xx xx AJxxx x I bid 3♦ because I want to reach the right game opposite Kx AKxx KQx xxxx or Kx AKxx xxx KQxx.

[Fluffy]

5-5 are not very good in 3NT, when you have to develop 2 suits to get to 9 tricks and the opponents only have to develop one to put you down you are the underdog, they are on lead first!

[jophorst]

Personally I don't like showing minors when having only four of it. I already have learned that an 1NT-opening often can be done on two 2-cards (either 5-4-2-2 or 6-3-2-2). So even a 5-5 doesn't guarantee a fit.

 

Another interesting question is how to show your minor suit. I'd like to show it by bidding my other minor. That increases the odds the 1NT opener becomes declarer.

[Free]

With a 5422 I prefer not to show the minor unless I'm interested in slam.

With a 5431 I'll usually show my minor, because I can pattern out and partner can decide if we can make 3NT. Exceptions are obviously singleton A/K/Q.

With a 5-5 I'll always bid my minor, just to find the best spot.

[WGF_Flame]

Thanks everyone

We agreed on something close to what Free said.

[mr1303]

Again, I'd like to promote Keri as a responding system to 1NT, which allows you to do all of these things.

 

1NT 2D 2H 2NT = GF, 5H 4m (with continuations asking for a shortage in responder's hand, allowing you to find a 5-2 major fit if required, a 4-4 or 5-4 minor fit when 3NT isn't playable or 3NT when it is.

1NT 2D 2H 3D = GF, 5H 5D

[mgoetze]

Another interesting question is how to show your minor suit.

It's not terribly interesting as the answer is quite obvious: transfers.

[Fluffy]

When you play transfers you have a problem with balanced invites that have to go somewhere else in your system, you can cope with that in some ways.

 

I never played transfers so can't tell how good/bad they are, I will just show what pairs Goded-Lantaron and I think Fantoni-Nunes play, as far a I know it was developed by Belladona very long ago:

 

1NT-2♦ = 5♥ or 5♠-4/5m and a singleton

2♥ = forced

 

1NT-2♦

2♥-2♠ 5431 relay (can also be 5521) showing any 5M, and any 4+m

2NT = forced

 

after 2NT responder bids:

 

3♣ = 4+ clubs singleton diamond

3♦ = 4+ diamonds, singleton club

3♥ = 5♥, singleton spade

3♠ = 5♠, singleton heart.

[Zelandakh]

The simple rule I learned is that you show the minor if you are willing to commit to 5m opposite a fit. Nowadays, with transfer rebids you can more easily show the minor without making a commitment but I think the concept is still valid. If you would never be interested in 5m (or 6m) then there is no reason to show it.

 

As for how to show the minor, over hearts this is easy. As long as you bundle your balanced invite into 2♠, you can organise the other hands via transfers. One popular option is for 2♠ to show any invite and to limit Opener's acceptance in such a way that the right contract is reached if Responder has a 5♥5m hand instead. Another is to include clubs in the 2♠ rebid along with the balanced invite and for 2NT to cover another awkward hand (such as a 5♥4♠ invite). What you use here will depend on what you had space for elsewhere in the structure.

 

After a 2♥ transfer this is harder. You are pretty much stuck with either natural or inversion. There are other solutions, as Fluffy points out, but they are more complex and usually involve making bigger changes to the NT structure than most players would be interested in.

[mgoetze]

After a 2♥ transfer this is harder. You are pretty much stuck with either natural or inversion. There are other solutions, as Fluffy points out, but they are more complex and usually involve making bigger changes to the NT structure than most players would be interested in.

Well, yes, I guess most players are not interested in making any changes at all. Having 1NT-2♣-2red-2♠ be an invitational hand with 5 spades doesn't seem to me to be a very big change to most Stayman structures though (and as an added bonus you sometimes get to play 2♠ on a declined invite).

[gnasher]

Well, yes, I guess most players are not interested in making any changes at all. Having 1NT-2♣-2red-2♠ be an invitational hand with 5 spades doesn't seem to me to be a very big change to most Stayman structures though (and as an added bonus you sometimes get to play 2♠ on a declined invite).

It may not be a big change, but it has significant costs: it wrongsides spades, leaks information about opener's heart length, and means we sometimes get to the wrong contract when responder has a signoff with five spades and four hearts.

[PhilKing]

Play transfers as invitational or better. This helps massively on a concealement basis - You play 2 articial transfer breaks, one showing a full max with two trumps and one to show a non min with a three card or better fit. Responder can just retransfer and bid game, or explore further if he desires. Usually the defence end up known very little about the shape of either hand.

 

Sign-offs are shown via reverse Stayman - opener bids the major he does not have. This gets you to 3♥ when you have a 5-4 fit, but opener would usually have broken a transfer anyway.

[Siegmund]

Play transfers as invitational or better.... Sign-offs are shown via reverse Stayman

 

Or play transfers as signoff-or-strong, and free up the 1NT-2D-2H-2NT/3H bids for new kinds of GF hands (like gnasher's distinguishing hands where opener has a choice on 4333 or not).

 

Admittedly works better when 2C is more Keri-like than when you are shoehorning hands into Stayman. But I could live with 1NT-2C-2D-2M as invitational with 5 like it was in the Goren days.

[cherdano]

Play transfers as invitational or better.

 

Wow I can't believe this trade-off is worth making. A sign-off in 2M is one of hte most frequent auctions over 1N IMO.

[PhilKing]

Wow I can't believe this trade-off is worth making. A sign-off in 2M is one of hte most frequent auctions over 1N IMO.

 

We still get to sign off in 2M.

[lalldonn]

It gets you to 3♥ when you have a 5-4 fit, it makes garbage stayman (an enormous winner when it comes up) impossible, it gives them extra artificial bids to double by both players, it prevents opener from super-accepting for either major (btw I strongly disagree with the idea that opener usually superaccepts with four in the major - it's still a clear minority action), it prevents you from competing effectively if the next opponent interferes (1NT p 2♣ 2♠...), and you lose whatever stayman followed by 2♠ was. That is what I thought of in the first three minutes of thinking about that convention. That is not "almost no trade off". If I ever played it I'm sure I would see all the good things it does, and more bad things as well.

(Edit - it wrongsides the major suit signoff, it loses the invite in hearts or some other bid after stayman since 1NT 2♣ 2♠ 3♥ is a signoff...)

 

It seems so unnecessary and pretty complicated to boot. Of all auctions, ones that start 1NT p transfer seem to be the least of my problems.

 

I have a little more experience against Keri and have seen it perform absolutely terribly. It gets you to so many bad 4-3 fits that I'm certain that one disadvantage overrides all advantages combined.

[PhilKing]

It gets you to 3♥ when you have a 5-4 fit,

 

Who doesn't get to three? Most people break with four hearts 80%+.

 

it makes garbage stayman (an enormous winner when it comes up) impossible,

 

Not quite, although it's a bit more of a gamble. We still bid 2♣ on a 4351 or a 3451 and punt a pass if partner open bids our 4-card major or bid 3♦. We gain outright when responder has a sign-off with 4M and 6m and hits a fit getting to an unbiddable game.

 

it gives them extra artificial bids to double by both players,

 

Not extra - just a different one. And if second seat wants to double after 1NT-p-2c-p-2h, then he is probably in a world of hurt.

it prevents opener from super-accepting for either major

 

When partner shows four of our major, the hand that knows what to do is in control - not vice versa. Outright gain, surely.

 

(btw I strongly disagree with the idea that opener usually superaccepts with four in the major - it's still a clear minority action), it prevents you from competing effectively if the next opponent interferes (1NT p 2♣ 2♠...),

 

OK - you personally are exempted from auto 3M auctions. So am I when the 54 fit is spades. Responder is in control.

 

If you play garbage Stayman, you can't compete that easily anyway.

 

and you lose whatever stayman followed by 2♠ was.

 

This is a gain compared with those who play Stayman followed by Two Spades invitational for the reasons Gnasher gave.

 

That is what I thought of in the first three minutes of thinking about that convention. That is not "almost no trade off". If I ever played it I'm sure I would see all the good things it does, and more bad things as well.

 

It seems so unnecessary and pretty complicated to boot.

 

It's really simple - promise!

 

Of all auctions, ones that start 1NT p transfer seem to be the least of my problems.

 

I have a little more experience against Keri and have seen it perform absolutely terribly. It gets you to so many bad 4-3 fits that I'm certain that one disadvantage overrides all advantages combined.

 

In England, most people who play Keri are pretty ordinary. Maybe it's not that bad.

 

 

.

[lalldonn]

80%? I didn't realize Britain was a different planet than the US but it must be. I would have said 20%. I super accept when I am worried about missing game or slam if I don't, not to announce to the world I have four cards and get higher than I have to. I'll try a Bridge Winners poll.

[benlessard]

If you want to invite and be able to stop in 2M. This is what we play in a weak NT setup.

 

 

1Nt --??

 

2C is all GF with MM and all invite without a long m

2red = Transfer are W or GF (could be 4M+5m if slammish)

2S inv with 5S (MMS stayman is probably better)

2Nt = transfer inv or better

3C = transfer inv or better

3D puppet

 

We dont have a club signoff (not a loss in a weak nt IMO) We do however have a D signoff at 2C--2D (almost forced) (sometimes we will play 3D however)

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

 

1Nt--2C--??

 

2D = almost forced

2H = 4or5 H minimum

the rest doesnt exist (could be max with 5D)

 

 

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

2C-2D--??

 

2H inv with 5H

2S inv with 4S

2nt inv (may have 4H)

 

This is way better than Keri (that I find awful) because you reach 43 fit only if you want to, plus an inv with a 5M is just not the same than a inv with a 4M.

 

Agree with Justin that supper accept should clearly be under 30% of the hands with 4 trumps. When I see people supper accepting a spade transfer with a middle range 4333 I just dont understand.

[gnasher]

80%? I didn't realize Britain was a different planet than the US but it must be. I would have said 20%. I super accept when I am worried about missing game or slam if I don't, not to announce to the world I have four cards and get higher than I have to. I'll try a Bridge Winners poll.

Yes, this is definitely different between (good players in) England and the USA.

 

The rationale for routinely breaking a transfer with 4-card support is this: when we have a nine-card fit without game-values it's likely that one or both sides can make a partscore, and unlikely that the opponents will let us play at the two-level. By jumping to 3♥ on a 15-count with 4-card support, we make it harder for them to judge whether to compete to 3♠ or 4m. Most pairs can't show a takeout double of the major on the first round, so it's still possible that 4th hand has a good hand.

 

However, I don't think that this argument has as much force when applied to Phil's methods. In his sequence

1NT-2♣

2♠-3♥

we've given them an opportunity to double 2♠, so the preemptive effect is reduced. Furthermore, opener has presumably denied four spades, which makes it safer for them to intervene.

Edited January 6, 2013 by gnasher

[PhilKing]

However, I don't think that this argument has as much force when applied to Phil's methods. In his sequence

1NT-2♣

2♠-3♥

we've given them an opportunity to double 2♠, so the preemptive effect is reduced.

 

I can't think of many hands that can sensibly double 2♠ to show spades - it should be a take-out double, just as if we had transferred to spades. But I am glad two people so far have suggested otherwise.

 

Also, if we remove to 3♥, they do not know that we have five hearts - we could have bid 2♣ on a 4441 five count, for instance (yes, I know, I have got one higher than everyone else again).

[Finch]

The simple rule I learned is that you show the minor if you are willing to commit to 5m opposite a fit. Nowadays, with transfer rebids you can more easily show the minor without making a commitment but I think the concept is still valid. If you would never be interested in 5m (or 6m) then there is no reason to show it.

 

 

Back to the original point of the thread....

 

I don't entirely agree with this. There's another reason to bid your shape out even if you aren't often intending to play in 5m. Consider:

 

Kx

xxx

AQx

AQJxx

 

opposite

AQxxx

x

Kxxx

xxx

 

4S is on a finesse or 3-3 break, but it's a rather better contract than 3NT. Give South 2-2 in the rounded suits and you'd still rather be in 4S

[JLOGIC]

5c seems even better and biddable depending on methods.

 

Needless to say I am in the camp that would never suppress a minor with 5431, it is always possible that 3n is the worst game when you have a stiff. Same with 5422 and weak doubletons.