What's standard here ?

[Cyberyeti]

We had a problem over the weekend in an undiscussed situation:

 

1N-2♣ (Stayman)-(X (clubs))-2♥-2N-3N was our auction, unfortunately neither of us had a club stop, for us P/XX are different degrees of suggesting playing in clubs over the double, but that's the extent of our agreements.

 

What would you assume undiscussed ? and what do you recommend here ?

[P_Marlowe]

Clubs is their suit, hence bidding 3C, should be a stopper ask,

or a ask for further clarification.

 

I would have assumed this to be standard.

[Fluffy]

I am seeing more and more that direct bidding promises a stopper while passing denies. The goal is to make declarer in 4M whoever has a honnor in clubs.

 

Given your agreements opener should had bid 3♣ instead of 3NT

[Cyberyeti]

Clubs is their suit, hence bidding 3C, should be a stopper ask,

or a ask for further clarification.

 

I would have assumed this to be standard.

 

From which hand ? we were absolutely agreed that had partner had a 3N bid rather than a 2N bid that is what 3♣ would have meant from him, and he could have stretched his 12 count.

 

I was 3442, was wondering whether I should have bid 3♦ over 2N to indicate accept/4♦/no club stop. 3♦ was in fact the last making spot with our 14 opposite 12.

[P_Marlowe]

From both side.

 

Although reading the full auction ..., I also believe that 2NT should promise

a club stopper, at least sort of.

Obviously you loose the chance to show inv. values, ..., you may solve this

by adding additional agreements, e.g. using xfer responses.

But unless I would play xfer responses in other situations, I would not do this,

I dont play often enough, and the given seq. is not high freq.

[Zelandakh]

This one has come up a few times before. My recommendation is 1NT - 2♣ - (X) and then:

P = club stop, then XX is a re-ask for Opener's major

XX = very good clubs, suggestion to play

2♦ = no stop, no 4 card major

2M = no club stop, 4 card major

 

The advantage of doing it this way (rather than pass denying) is that it increases the chances of playing 2♣X when it is right and also shows the major when they are most likely to be raising.

[Phil]

Im surprised this hasn't been written about, but a common method played here:

 

Pass = denies a stop or the nuts in clubs, like AQT9x. XX = moderately suggestive of playing 2C xx'd - like AQTx.

 

After pass: xx is a re-ask (see below) Nd shows at least an invite, 2D/2H garbage stayman varieties, 2S = 5 card invite.

 

After responder's xx:

 

--2D = hearts

--2H = spades

--2S = neither

--2N = both majors, min (then 3C puppets to 3D for a signoff and direct 3M is forcing)

--3C = both majors, extras (GF created)

 

#stayman

#whenstaymanisdoubled

[rmnka447]

Interesting question from OP.

 

Opener has the opportunity to show his/her values with a bid over the double. So 2 ♦ should show 5 ♦ no 4 card major, 2 ♥ 4+ ♥, 2 ♠ 4+ ♠.

 

Pass and XX suggest some sort of ♣ holding, but I'm not sure that I agree with Phil. If pass is made intending to pass responder's redouble reask about the majors, then NT bidder puts himself in the position of possible playing 2 ♣xx opposite a void or stiff. Wouldn't it be better to redouble to show 5+ ♣ and let responder make the decision whether to play 2 ♣xx? Then pass would show either 3-3-4-3, 3-3-3-4, or some holding with 4-4 in the minors.

 

After 2 ♥ in the actual auction, a lot depends on whether you use transfers or not. If you use transfers, then 2 ♠ is an undefined bid as with 5 ♠ and not 4 ♥ a transfer would be used instead of Stayman. If you don't use transfers, then 2 ♠ should be 5+ invitational. So with transfers, you could redefine 2 ♠ and use it perhaps to show invitational values without a stop. Then 2 NT could be an invite with a stopper.

 

Undiscussed I would think responder's 2 NT just shows invitational values and not a ♥ fit. It might be that 2 NT without a ♣ stop is the last makeable contract. 3 ♣ and 3 NT by responder would show game going values without and with a ♣ stopper. Similarly, 3 ♣ and 3 NT by opener after responder's 2 NT would show similar holdings.

[SteveMoe]

Im surprised this hasn't been written about, but a common method played here:

 

Pass = denies a stop or the nuts in clubs, like AQT9x. XX = moderately suggestive of playing 2C xx'd - like AQTx.

 

After pass: xx is a re-ask (see below) Nd shows at least an invite, 2D/2H garbage stayman varieties, 2S = 5 card invite.

 

After responder's xx:

 

--2D = hearts

--2H = spades

--2S = neither

--2N = both majors, min (then 3C puppets to 3D for a signoff and direct 3M is forcing)

--3C = both majors, extras (GF created)

 

#stayman

#whenstaymanisdoubled

 

In support:

 

http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/when-our-stayman-is-doubled/

[maartenxq]

Im surprised this hasn't been written about, but a common method played here:

 

Pass = denies a stop or the nuts in clubs, like AQT9x. XX = moderately suggestive of playing 2C xx'd - like AQTx.

 

After pass: xx is a re-ask (see below) Nd shows at least an invite, 2D/2H garbage stayman varieties, 2S = 5 card invite.

 

After responder's xx:

 

--2D = hearts

--2H = spades

--2S = neither

--2N = both majors, min (then 3C puppets to 3D for a signoff and direct 3M is forcing)

--3C = both majors, extras (GF created)

 

Nice system but not to be recommended unless agreed before. On bbo would suggest simpler approach.

1 nt - p - 2!c - x

2 !h - p - ?

2!s 4 no stop

2 nt stop inv

3 !c no M ask stop

3 nt 4 and stop

assuming stayman does not guarantee 4 M.

Common sense says u cannot bid 3 nt here without checking or promising for stop.

[jallerton]

We had a problem over the weekend in an undiscussed situation:

 

1N-2♣ (Stayman)-(X (clubs))-2♥-2N-3N was our auction, unfortunately neither of us had a club stop, for us P/XX are different degrees of suggesting playing in clubs over the double, but that's the extent of our agreements.

 

What would you assume undiscussed ? and what do you recommend here ?

 

I would assume that 3♣ asks for a stop from both sides. If Responder has a game force, he can bid 3♣ over 2♥. If Responder is precisely invitational, then I don't see any alternative to 2NT. This puts the onus on Opener, if accepting the invitation, to bid 3♣ over 2NT if worried about the stopper situation. This is clearly not perfect, in particular we could declare 2NT on a marked club lead when neither of us has a stop in clubs, but that is what I would assume in an undiscussed situation.

[jallerton]

Im surprised this hasn't been written about, but a common method played here:

 

Pass = denies a stop or the nuts in clubs, like AQT9x. XX = moderately suggestive of playing 2C xx'd - like AQTx.

 

Personally, I would want to be rather more than moderately suggestive of playing in 2♣xx holding ♣AQ10x over the doubler!

[gszes]

The right strain is always the most important factor and any slammish considerations should take a back seat to game/partial aspirations when there is an obvious :white elepahnt: in the room. Opener has already denied having anything substantial in clubs and with a club lead looming even bidding 2n w/o a club stop is doing nothing but courting disaster. IMHO it should be standard (if it is not and apparently it is not) for responder to bid 2s with the 4 spades and invitational hand w/o a club stop. No matter what else you may have reserved for a 2s bid (after 2h). The same problem exists if opener bids 2d and once again I would drop any special considerations y9u have for 2h and or 2s and make them simply a 4 card suit with no club stop and invitational. Given these are not considered obvious responder seems forced to bid 2n and opener definitely should bid 3c. (jallerton)

 

This principle applies mostly to slam auctions where someone x a 5c or 5d artificial response and the partnership has to address :control: issues before going on. There seems to be no reason why this principle cannot apply to low level auctions as well.

[nige1]

We had a problem over the weekend in an undiscussed situation:

1N-2♣ (Stayman)-(X (clubs))-2♥-2N-3N

was our auction, unfortunately neither of us had a club stop, for us P/XX are different degrees of suggesting playing in clubs over the double, but that's the extent of our agreements. What would you assume undiscussed ? and what do you recommend here ?

I am seeing more and more that direct bidding promises a stopper while passing denies. The goal is to make declarer in 4M whoever has a honnor in clubs.

Given your agreements opener should had bid 3♣ instead of 3NT

I agree with Fluffy.

I would assume that 3♣ asks for a stop from both sides. If Responder has a game force, he can bid 3♣ over 2♥. If Responder is precisely invitational, then I don't see any alternative to 2NT. This puts the onus on Opener, if accepting the invitation, to bid 3♣ over 2NT if worried about the stopper situation. This is clearly not perfect, in particular we could declare 2NT on a marked club lead when neither of us has a stop in clubs, but that is what I would assume in an undiscussed situation.

Jallerton makes sense.

Im surprised this hasn't been written about, but a common method played here: Pass = denies a stop or the nuts in clubs, like AQT9x. XX = moderately suggestive of playing 2C xx'd - like AQTx. d

After pass: xx is a re-ask (see below) Nd shows at least an invite, 2D/2H garbage stayman varieties, 2S = 5 card invite.

After responder's xx:

--2D = hearts

--2H = spades

--2S = neither

--2N = both majors, min (then 3C puppets to 3D for a signoff and direct 3M is forcing)

--3C = both majors, extras (GF created)

#stayman

#whenstaymanisdoubled

♠ x x x x ♥ x x x ♦ Q x x x ♣ x x

1N (Pass) 2♣ (Double) Redouble (Pass) ??

If the redouble shows something like

♠ A x x ♥ A x x ♦ J x ♣ A Q J x x

then 2♣ X might be miracle make and will often be your cheapest escape

2♣XX, however, seems quite a gamble, because it may be tough to explain to your other pair why you lost 1000 on the board.

For the 1N opener, perhaps

• XX = No ♣ stop.
• Pass = Good ♣s.
• 2♦/2♥/2♠ = NAT

[benlessard]

I agree with Phil i dont want to play 2Cx, I want to play 2Cxx

 

so its a FP sequence and FP inv is a nice method

 

XX = medium interest in 2Cxx while pass is strong interest in 2Cxx or no desire to declare.

[mycroft]

Keri (at least the original book) suggests you play "pass = no stop (and then XX='bid 2♦ like I told you to'), 2♦ = stop".

I've seen both - in this thread, no less - this way for Stayman, and the reverse: pass shows, bid denies.

 

I follow the book because we follow the book, but my question: what's the advantage to playing "bid shows"? I would have thought the "mild offer to play" feature of "pass shows" would be the advantage, but I Have Been Wrong before...

[Zelandakh]

I follow the book because we follow the book, but my question: what's the advantage to playing "bid shows"? I would have thought the "mild offer to play" feature of "pass shows" would be the advantage, but I Have Been Wrong before...

As I pointed out earlier, the main advantage is the fact that you are showing your suit when they are most likely to be raising theirs. Plying a strong NT, I would imagine a stop is held more often than not and that therefore playing it the other way round means you show that suit more often. Playing a weak NT I cannot immediately think of any serious advantage of the other way.

[Stefan_O]

You dont mention what 1NT-2NT is in your system... I assume it's conventional, since it seems responder here bid 2♣ without a major?

 

In that case, you CAN play in 2NT without a stopper, but opener must bid 3C (not 3NT) with max and no stopper.

 

Otherwise, this is a good illustration why it's a really bad idea to use 2♣ without major, since it gives away info only your opps have use of, and also gives them this opportunity to lead-double (or sometimes overcall on the 2-level).

 

More efficient to have 2NT natural, and never bid 2C without major.

 

If you bid this hand, 1NT-2NT-3NT, likely you would get a major-lead.