Checkback Stayman

[Vampyr]

Our 'book' says that we should not be hung up on always rebidding 1NT. If the major is a good one - eg KJ98, and a poor doubleton then rebid the major rather than 1NT.

 

Then toss the book. Do not rebid a 4-card major suit. Ever.

[rmnka447]

4450 is pretty rare distribution. Plus you can handle it naturally, just bid 1c-1d-1nt-2s-2nt-3h?

Certainly that will work for a GF hand. What about a similar invitational hand? Same sequence?

 

Nobody is arguing against NMF or some other better checkback scheme after 1m-1M. We were just saying that maybe it's not necessary after specifically 1c-1d-1nt. You can use new *major* forcing :).

 

I don't disagree, but part of the decision to use or not use it may be the extent you're willing to use Walsh (bypass longer ♦ suit with weaker hands). Also, in some cases, doing everything one way may be easier to absorb and remember. Take your choice.

 

Huh? Before NMF, 1d-1h-1nt-2c was non-forcing, you couldn't really do that. Also, I think in the very old days second round jumps by responder were mostly GF. At least they were that way in all the old Goren books I read. Jumps being invitational is a more modern trend I think. Back then basically there wasn't a way to show exactly invitational.

 

Right about 2 ♣ so you'd have to jump to 3 ♣ to force. As for jumps being invitational, I'm thinking back to Bergen's articles in the Bridge Bulletin back in the late '70s when he explained NMF and a lot of other modern bidding innovations to the wide ACBL audience. I believe by that time jumps were being played as invitational. But you hit on the important point that there was no easy way to show both invitational and game forcing. I just thought this was a good point to bring up to make a newer player aware of and to consider.

[Liversidge]

Then toss the book. Do not rebid a 4-card major suit. Ever.

 

 

Apologies. If you read the quote from Tramtickets post immediately above my comment you will see that I was responding (in bad grammar) to a Checkback question on whether partner and I would always rebid 1NT after opening 1C with 15-17 HCP and partner responded 1D. My intended meaning was that with a good four card major and a small doubleton "my rebid could well be in the major".

[Vampyr]

Apologies. If you read the quote from Tramtickets post immediately above my comment you will see that I was responding (in bad grammar) to a Checkback question on whether partner and I would always rebid 1NT after opening 1C with 15-17 HCP and partner responded 1D. My intended meaning was that with a good four card major and a small doubleton "my rebid could well be in the major".

ah right. Sorry!