1NT 3n

[kiwinacol]

Hello all, most play 1NT - [2d/2h/2s and perhaps 2N] as transfers and many also use Texas type bids. That seems to make natural, strong 3 level bids an under-utilised set.

 

 

Why would one need to bid 1NT 3H; except say to set trumps and demand a cue of cheapest ace (I made that meaning up)? I guess 1N 3m; could be an outside 4M with the long minor. Some of those hands are hard to describe. What else are 3C, 3D, 3H and 3S used for?

[The_Badger]

There are many different ways of interpreting these bids. A previous BBO forum post shown below

 

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/66431-3rd-level-responses-to-1nt-opening/

 

and bridgeguys

 

http://www.bridgeguys.com/Conventions/three_level_response_methods_to_1nt.html

 

Take your pick

[kiwinacol]

nice, thanks.

There are many different ways of interpreting these bids. A previous BBO forum post shown below

 

http://www.bridgebas...to-1nt-opening/

 

and bridgeguys

 

http://www.bridgeguy...ods_to_1nt.html

 

Take your pick

[spotlight7]

Hello all, most play 1NT - [2d/2h/2s and perhaps 2N] as transfers and many also use Texas type bids. That seems to make natural, strong 3 level bids an under-utilised set.

 

 

Why would one need to bid 1NT 3H; except say to set trumps and demand a cue of cheapest ace (I made that meaning up)? I guess 1N 3m; could be an outside 4M with the long minor. Some of those hands are hard to describe. What else are 3C, 3D, 3H and 3S used for?

 

 

1N-3C* I use to show 5-5 majors. You can avoid bad 4M and bid good games with 20+

 

 

Opener bids the full value of their hand so responder may pass a 3M bid.

 

With GF values, responder rebids 3N with 5-5M and only raises to 4M with 6+ trump.

 

 

1N-3D* I use for Puppet Stayman.

 

 

1N-3H* is used for 99% of balanced slam range hands.

 

You tell partner your HCP total 'minus' any jacks.

 

If a fit is found, you should bid slam with 31+ working HCPs.

 

 

If you are not bidding slam, stopping in 3N is a fair option.

 

 

1N-3S* is 5-5+ minors. JLall says to use it with 5-4 hands, however, I have not yet checked it against example hands.

 

Since I show shortness over Stayman, I suspect I can find a minor fit that way.

 

 

If the 5-4 minor hand is 5422, I would use my 1N-3H* bid and find a fit that way if slam is suitable.

[xbabarx]

nice, thanks.

 

its all about what you and your partner agree

[Tramticket]

What is your NT range? The sequence 1NT, 3X as natural, slam invite probably makes more sense in a weak NT context I play it this way and we find it effective.

 

Playing a strong NT, you are more likely to want transfer to "right side" the contract.

[kiwinacol]

I play Acol, 12-14 and 2o1 with 15-17.

 

thanks

 

What is your NT range? The sequence 1NT, 3X as natural, slam invite probably makes more sense in a weak NT context I play it this way and we find it effective.

 

Playing a strong NT, you are more likely to want transfer to "right side" the contract.

[miamijd]

A very common use is to play

 

3C as Puppet Stayman (asking only for a 5-card major; use regular Stayman otherwise; opener bids 3D with no 5cM and responder can then show a splinter or fragment major)

 

3D is minors GF+

 

3H is 5/5 major invite

3S is 5/5 major GF+

 

There are many other options, of course.

 

Cheers,

mike

[RD350LC]

Hello all, most play 1NT - [2d/2h/2s and perhaps 2N] as transfers and many also use Texas type bids. That seems to make natural, strong 3 level bids an under-utilised set.

 

 

Why would one need to bid 1NT 3H; except say to set trumps and demand a cue of cheapest ace (I made that meaning up)? I guess 1N 3m; could be an outside 4M with the long minor. Some of those hands are hard to describe. What else are 3C, 3D, 3H and 3S used for?

This is all dependent upon partnership agreement. One method that I have read about is to have the 3 level bids show 4441, with a singleton in the suit bid. Of course, this would have to be game forcing.

[torgums]

I use 3m over 1NT to show a good but not solid 6 card minor and no other values. It is basically to play. But if opener can fill in the suit there will be 6 tricks available. He bids 3 NT if he can take 3 tricks in the other suits.

I use 3M over 1 NT to show a singleton in the suit bid and 4 cards in all the other suits with 12+ HCPs. This holding can produce a slam when opener has no duplication of values in the suit bid.

[silvr bull]

I prefer a simple style that is mostly natural. My 1NT open is 12-14, and no transfers after we open 1NT. The rest of my preferred two and three level structure after we open 1NT is:

2C is Stayman (or possibly a garbage runout), and may start a game invite sequence in majors or minors.

2D is Game Force Stayman. Great for slam invite sequences, or choosing the best game.

2M is weak to play.

2NT is a balanced invite with 11-12 HCP.

3m is weak to play. Invites to 3NT with a good fit for my minor suit start with 2C.

3M invites only to 4M, but not to 3NT. Invites to either 3NT or 4M start with 2C.

[Vampyr]

I play 3♣ as 5-card Stayman wth no puppet (I play weak NT so there is no need to try to rightside the contract while also revealing more than is necessary about opener's hand). 3♦ I use for 5+/5+ minors GF. Never comes up.

 

3M is a 3-card fragment with a singleton in the other major.

 

If you use this scheme you could also give up the somewhat redundant 3♦ bid and use it for some kind or Baron or Minor Suit Stayman. I may try the latter soon.

[Zelandakh]

Hello all, most play 1NT - [2d/2h/2s and perhaps 2N] as transfers and many also use Texas type bids. That seems to make natural, strong 3 level bids an under-utilised set.

First of all, you should not underestimate the usefulness of agreeing a trump suit at the 3 level to initiate cue bids. This is something that many NT structures choose to give up on and I personally think it is a mistake. I personally still use 1NT - 3m for this purpose, freeing the minor suit transfer sequences for the 4M+m and 5m+5om hand types. I previously played 1NT - 3M like this too but came up with a (sadly fairly complicated) method for incorporating them into the Jacoby transfers.

 

The traditional way of using 3 level responses with full transfers is to cover 3-suited hands. There are a few different variations but a popular one uses 3m to handle 4441 hands and 3M for (13)(45) types. My system is similarly using 3M responses for a couple of 4441 types that are otherwise mildly awkward.

 

The more modern approach here is to use 3♣ as Puppet Stayman, often combined with the 3M = (13)(45) as before. I personally prefer playing the older 2♣ Puppet Stayman if using it at all, which is why the (13)(45) hands do not require a special 3-level response for me. How you play 3♦ in the 3♣ Puppet structure depends on how the rest of it fits together - GF with both minors is one option.

 

 

If you use this scheme you could also give up the somewhat 3♦ bid and use it for some kind or Baron or Minor Suit Stayman. I may try the latter soon.

It is generally much more efficient to run your Baron/MSS sequences via Stayman. After a 2♦ or 2♥ response, use 2♠ as a Baron range ask, covering both this hand type and the invites to 3NT. This trick does not work after a 2♠ response but here the 3♦ rebid can be used (with 3♥=♣ and 3♠=♦) if you have arranged your hand types carefully enough so as not to need this naturally. This was the system I used when I was last using normal Stayman and I would strongly suggest it in preference to using the 3♦ response for that purpose.

[Vampyr]

It is generally much more efficient to run your Baron/MSS sequences via Stayman. After a 2♦

 

then what do you do with weak 5♠ 4♥ ?

or 2♥

 

then what do you do with ♠ invitational?

response, use 2♠ as a Baron range ask, covering both this hand type and the invites to 3NT.

 

I am sure you have ways, but they are probably very complicated!

[kiwinacol]

thank you all, I'm enjoying reading the responses..

 

then what do you do with weak 5♠ 4♥ ?

 

then what do you do with ♠ invitational?

 

I am sure you have ways, but they are probably very complicated!

 

 

 

[Zelandakh]

then what do you do with weak 5♠ 4♥ ?

Playing normal Stayman you can choose between 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 2♥ (weak with both majors) or simply transferring into 2♠.

 

 

then what do you do with ♠ invitational?

1NT - 2♣; 2♥ - 2NT = INV with 4♠. 1NT - 2♥; 2♠ - 2NT = INV with 5♠. 1NT - 2♥; 2♠ - 3♠ = INV with 6+♠

 

 

I am sure you have ways, but they are probably very complicated!

It is complicated in as much as it uses the skip-bid method (bid what you do not have) but is really not so bad as the internal logic is consistent. As an example of that, I also suggest playing 1NT - 2♦; 2♥ - 2NT as INV with 5♥4♠ and 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 2NT as INV with 5♠4♥. In each case re-bidding 2NT shows extra spade length while 2♠ denies it.

 

The potentially complicated part comes in organising your minor-based hands to free up 3♦ over 1NT - 2♣; 2♠. I did this by including only diamond-based hands within Stayman and moving all club-based hands to direct responses but there are other structures that also work for this. You only have one rebid (3♣) available so you need to restrict the included hands to those that can be unwound in a very limited space. Creating designs that not only work but retain their internal logic is, for me, much more complicated than remembering the resulting structure.

[Vampyr]

So 1NT-2NT is natural and invitational?

 

Anyway there are other complicated parts too, right, like showing a 5-card major and making a balanced invite?

[Zelandakh]

So 1NT-2NT is natural and invitational?

 

Anyway there are other complicated parts too, right, like showing a 5-card major and making a balanced invite?

I prefer the balanced invite going through 1NT - 2♠, both for efficiency and because it fits with the internal logic for the rebids. In this way a 2♠ bid by Responder always includes a 2NT invite.

 

The 5-card major invites are as above: 1NT - 2♦; 2♥ - 2♠ for hearts and 1NT - 2♥; 2♠ - 2NT for spades. It is precisely this requirement for a natural 2NT in the 2♥ complex that makes this the bottle-neck auction within Stayman sequences. Non-forcing end-station calls at the 2 level by Responder nearly always work out less efficient than bundling hands within forcing sequences and using ParadoX techniques.