Stayman?

[eagles123]

Matchpoints 12-14 NT

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sa985hqt98d972c53&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1np]133|200[/hv]

 

is it sensible to bid stayman here, or is the risk of say a 3334 or even 3325 just too great?

 

i.e. is it worth the gamble?

 

thanks,

 

Eagles

[ArtK78]

It is not unreasonable to Stayman here, but I would pass 1NT. If partner has a 4 card major, you probably want to be in 2 of a major.

 

Even if partner bids 2♦ with x-y-4-z, you probably don't want to be in 2♦.

[helene_t]

Can you bid 2♥ after partner's 2♦, showing a weak hand with both majors, or would that mean something else?

[eagles123]

yes that would in theory show 5 hearts and 4 spades for us. (and weak)

[Cyberyeti]

yes that would in theory show 5 hearts and 4 spades for us. (and weak)

 

Providing you have the agreement that with 3 spades and 2 hearts you always remove 2♥ to 2♠ in this auction, it's a viable action.

[the_clown]

Pass.

 

Maybe they will balance and then you can double for takeout, maybe partner doesn't have a 4 card major, maybe 1NT will score better even though you have an 8 card fit.

[mikestar13]

Stayman is best used for 2 types of hands: (1) game invitational or better hands with major suit interest (2) hopeless hands which will pass partner's rebid. This hand falls between those ranges and is better passed. Change the ♠A to a small spade and I would risk Stayman in spite of the poor diamonds.

[wank]

yes that would in theory show 5 hearts and 4 spades for us. (and weak)

 

what you mean is that 2 hearts shows both majors with hearts at least as long as spades.

 

to accomodate 44 or indeed 55, partner just corrects to his better major. this means that when you're 45 and partner is 32 you play the 4-3 rather than the 5-2 but that's not a problem (43 fits are often difficult for less experienced players, but no point shying away from them if you want to improve).

 

as for the merits of doing this, at pairs it's a very good idea - even if you're making 1nt, 2M will normally score better and 2M will often make when 1NT is off.

 

at imps, if you have enough points to expect to make 1NT, but not enough to invite, so about 7/8 - 10, it's a bad gamble, because you have to make a trick more to go positive and you'll only be modestly increasing your score when it succeeds. if you have a weak hand, yes, it's a good bet, because you will often move from a contract going down to one making. especially against weaker opponents you also make it a lot more difficult for them to double you - even weak players with enough points know to double 1NT, but a weak player will be lost over stayman with a good hand. they often do something silly like bidding 2NT.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Can you bid 2♥ after partner's 2♦, showing a weak hand with both majors, or would that mean something else?

1NT - 2C

2D - 2H! = Garbage ( Trash ) Stayman showing a weak [ (4/4)+ or 5s/4h ] ; Opener passes or corrects to 2S with equal length or longer ♠.

 

With a weak 4s/5h, Responder just transfers to 2H and then passes.

[helene_t]

1NT - 2C

2D - 2H! = Garbage ( Trash ) Stayman showing a weak [ (4/4)+ or 5s/4h ] ; Opener passes or corrects to 2S with equal length or longer ♠.

 

With a weak 4s/5h, Responder just transfers to 2H and then passes.

He-he I was actually asking for Eagles' agreements, not yours :)

 

But as Wank notes, if you have the agreement that 2♥ shows 5+♥ 4+♠ you can easily extend to cover 4-4 as well.

[Wackojack]

If the field plays Acol weak no trump like you, then pass and trust that you will do at least as well as the field. OTOH if the field plays 15-17 5 card majors, then the risk of missing the 4-4 major fit and getting a poor MP score is greater than the risk of playing in a 4-3 fit; so then you must Stayman (as indicated in the other posts).

[wyman]

I always GS with this hand.

[eagles123]

many thanks folks, very helpful.

[Zelandakh]

My personal rule for using Exit Stayman with hands like this is 3+ majors and 4+ diamonds. So this would not qualify. Of course, if you also have 2♣ followed by 2♥ available as Crawling Stayman then this changes things. There are a few different ways of playing this CS sequence but allowing 4-4 majors seems like a good idea regardless of which major Opener gives preference to with equal length. The main advantage of preferring hearts is that you can then also use it for hands with 4 hearts and a longer minor. Preferring spades seems to be more popular on BBF though. Perhaps that reflects the majority choice of a strong NT more than the relative merits within a weak NT system - the other method allows Responder to bid on after Opener's spade preference, something that seems more useful within a strong NT context.

[1eyedjack]

I could have 2-2 in the majors and open 1N. Perhaps a bit unlucky to catch such a hand but maybe it adds to the case for passing.

[Vampyr]

I could have 2-2 in the majors and open 1N. Perhaps a bit unlucky to catch such a hand but maybe it adds to the case for passing.

 

Perhaps more unlucky that your system permits this shape.

 

As for Zel's post above, I think that bidding Stayman and planning to pass (sorry, I am not familiar with his terminology) with 4+ diamonds and 3+ majors is pretty weird. Playing this you deserve partner to be holding 3=3=2=5, which is a normal shape.

[Cyberyeti]

Perhaps more unlucky that your system permits this shape.

 

As for Zel's post above, I think that bidding Stayman and planning to pass (sorry, I am not familiar with his terminology) with 4+ diamonds and 3+ majors is pretty weird. Playing this you deserve partner to be holding 3=3=2=5, which is a normal shape.

 

Yes, but particularly at pairs (or NV at teams), on frequency grounds you accept the odd 3325 stupidity for the times you find a better place which happens much more often.

[MrAce]

This is N/B forum, i strongly suggest anyone who thinks they belong to this level to not worry about garbage stayman, exit stayman fire stayman earthquake stayman tornado stayman etc etc....and just pass and try to make as much as tricks you can. Considering your level, the number of important things waiting in front of you to learn is way too much that you should not be wasting your time with this imho.

 

Fwiw, spot cards are game changer especially in 1 NT contracts. You have 6 hcp and decent spots, i would not worry playing 1 NT even vs a weak NT with this hand.

[StevenG]

Yes, but particularly at pairs (or NV at teams), on frequency grounds you accept the odd 3325 stupidity for the times you find a better place which happens much more often.

What about the numerous times when your 2-level contract plays worse than 1N, even if only by 10 points? That's a disaster at pairs if you're the only pair in the room in it.

[helene_t]

What about the numerous times when your 2-level contract plays worse than 1N, even if only by 10 points? That's a disaster at pairs if you're the only pair in the room in it.

But aren't we talking about weak hands with which 1NT is in danger? You probably won't make more than +90, then, unless you find a major suit fit. If the choice is between 1NT and 2♦, be happy with any plus score.

[Endymion77]

I would pass, the hand is too strong for garbage Stayman. Looks like strength is about equally distributed so 1NT shouldn't be in a big danger, they probably won't be able to double and -100 or +90 should be OK.

[mikeh]

Garbage stayman is a very useful tool, especially for those playing weak notrump. Over here, at least in the Pacific northwest, weak notrump is the exception rather than the rule, so it would be very unusual to see a beginner/novice player using it.

 

What I don't know is the rest of the response structure. This is important, since if we use a 2♥ runout over a 2♦ response to stayman as garbage stayman, suggesting declarer pass or correct, then we lose whatever meaning this sequence might otherwise have.

 

In one of my partnerships, we play 2 way stayman, with artificial responses to the 2♦ game force stayman call. The result is that with invitational hands with a 5+ major we need to go through 2♣ first. Should opener bid 2♦ our life is easy with 6+ since we bid 3M. With 5♠ we bid 2♠ but with precisely 5♥ we have no call, since we play garbage stayman. We 'solve' this problem by using responder's 2N over opener's 2♦ as invitational in notrump but may have 5♥s. Opener either passes or bids on. Bidding on shows acceptance of game, and opener can bid 3♥ to check back for the heart suit.

 

 

On the other hand, what if one plays transfers? Then one doesn't need my kludge above, but now maybe the 2♥ call might show 5♥ and 4♠. Some might want it to be weak, while others might want it to be invitational. It doesn't much matter so long as you recognize that adopting one convention often requires rethinking other sequences and, in some cases, this ripple effect spreads a long way. I think this is a good part of Timo's rant ( :D ) against recommending GS in this forum. I share his concerns, but since it has been mentioned I thought I'd show why, at least imo, it isn't a good idea to simply say: wow, that sounds like a good convention...let's use it.

 

Getting back to the OP, I would absolutely bid garbage stayman if available. The odds are quite high that partner has a major and, when he does, we are almost always going to score better in 2M than in 1N.

 

Even on those occasions when he lacks a 4 card major, 2M in a 4-3 fit will often, tho not always and maybe not mostly score the same as or better than 1N.

 

The only time when it is 'right' to pass is when 2M fares worse than 1N. That will happen on a substantial number of hands, but I think the upside is significantly greater than the downside.

 

Not playing GS, I'd pass, since now we can't always reach a 4-3 major suit fit and now the odds shift, in my view.

[Vampyr]

This is N/B forum, i strongly suggest anyone who thinks they belong to this level to not worry about garbage stayman, exit stayman fire stayman earthquake stayman tornado stayman etc etc...

 

It doesn't seem to me to be any more complicated for beginners to learn that Stayman can be bid on any strength than to learn that it must be bid on invitational or better hands only. It seems especially simple to learn, first of all, that you can bid Stayman planning to pass any response. If people do this, a 2 ♥ pass- or- correct rebid will probably suggest itself eventually.

[MrAce]

It doesn't seem to me to be any more complicated for beginners to learn that Stayman can be bid on any strength than to learn that it must be bid on invitational or better hands only. It seems especially simple to learn, first of all, that you can bid Stayman planning to pass any response. If people do this, a 2 ♥ pass- or- correct rebid will probably suggest itself eventually.

 

You are wrong about novice and beginner level overall. But when you play garbage stayman or similar stayman, your entire system will be effected from this. No Novice or beginner needs to change their system just to try to find a 4-4 4-3 5-2 fits. No need to announce that you have a weak stayman hand to opps either. First they need to come to a level that they can manage 4-3 5-2 fit trumps.

 

And it never ends with garbage stayman, there are a lot of other things which are as easy to learn, they become a huge amount of things to memorize which they don't need ,most of the time.But playing reasonable lines as declarer or making reasonable basic defense is something they need every single hand.. Let them spend their time and energy to mostly card play, defense, reading opponents hand, counting cards, counting hcps of the opps and play a system as simple as possible. All of this are like some background application on your pc, running in the back ground and slowing your processor.

[1eyedjack]

Perhaps context is relevant. This thread developed from an original post in the N/B forum from someone who, rightly or wrongly, felt that the thread belonged here. Clearly he had a variant of garbage Stayman in mind when posting the query. It seems to me that the issue that he was raising was not whether garbage Stayman is a good thing or a bad thing, or what it meant, but rather whether this hand is an appropriate example of its use. Who are we to judge that he is incapable of handling the response?