1nt-2nt Puppet stayman variant

[raspeball]

True. I didn't think of that. :(

 

 

Yes, but at the cost of revealing that he has honours he wants to protect.

 

Thank you for many good suggestions and correction of ideas that don't work!

I think my prefered variant so far is something like this:

 

2nt= Forces 3♣. Can be used if responder want to play 3♣.

If responder is game-forcing he has one of the following hands:

* 4-3 in the majors.

* One 4 card major suit(0-2 in the other) (Changed from previous version where this showed 3 card major and 0-2 in the other).

* 3-3 in the majors.

 

With all these hands responder can show his hand, and opener does not have to reveal more than wheter he has support for responder.

 

Hands with 4-4 in the majors bid 2♣ initially. Hands with one 3 card major and 0-2 in the other have to find another way to bid their hand (If responder have singleton or void in a major it could be a good idea to show the short suit instead).

 

Responses:

 

1nt-2nt

3♣?

3♦=4-3/3-4 in majors. Responses as suggested by nullve (But giving opener some freedom with how he wants to bid hands with 5 card majors).

3♥=4 card spades. Not interested in hearts.

3♠=4 card hearts. Not interested in spades

3nt=3-3 in majors (And normally 5 card+ in a minor)

[nullve]

Another idea:

 

* Use the Jacoby transfer 2M-1 also as "M Stayman" on choice-of-game type hands with 4 M and 0-2 OM. (Problem: Must figure out how to sign off in 3N on these hands after 1N-2M-1; 2M(= 2-3 M or 4M333). Maybe use 3♠ over 1N-2M-1; 2M as a puppet to 3N?)

* Use

Should have been 'marionette to 3N', as Opener must be allowed to bypass 3N with 4M333 or, say, 3 M and a weak doubleton in OM.

 

In an otherwise standard rebid structure, how about

 

1N-2♦; 2♥-3♠ = a) autosplinter (with 6+ H and 0-1 S) b) CoG w/ 4 H and 2 S

 

1N-2♦; 2♥-3♠; ?:

 

3N = to play opposite b)

...P = b)

...other = a)

4♣+ = wants to avoid 3N opposite b)

 

?

 

Something similar could be done when M=♠ by using Stayman on all GF hands with 5+S and 5+ H, temporarily freeing up the sequence 1N-2♥; 2♠-3♥.

[raspeball]

Should have been 'marionette to 3N', as Opener must be allowed to bypass 3N with 4M333 or, say, 3 M and a weak doubleton in OM.

 

In an otherwise standard rebid structure, how about

 

1N-2♦; 2♥-3♠ = a) autosplinter (with 6+ H and 0-1 S) b) CoG w/ 4 H and 2 S

 

1N-2♦; 2♥-3♠; ?:

 

3N = to play opposite b)

...P = b)

...other = a)

4♣+ = wants to avoid 3N opposite b)

 

?

 

Something similar could be done when M=♠ by using Stayman on all GF hands with 5+S and 5+ H, temporarily freeing up the sequence 1N-2♥; 2♠-3♥.

 

Yes. That is possible. I think one of the swedish systems ~30 years ago (Super Standard?) used transfers to show 4 card majors.

 

If you use the sequence: 1nt-2♥;2♠-3♥ to show 4 card spades you need to put the 5-5 major hands elsewhere. As you say, stayman is one possibility.

One solution that i have seen is:

1nt-2♣

2♦-3♦=5-5 in major. Game invitational or stronger. But then you loose the natural 3♦ in this sequence.

[nullve]

One solution that i have seen is:

1nt-2♣

2♦-3♦=5-5 in major. Game invitational or stronger. But then you loose the natural 3♦ in this sequence.

Some versions of Smolen use one or both of Responder's 4m rebids on GF 5-5 hands.

 

E.g. the one described here (by Ana Roth? Paul Lavings?), which in a little more detail seems to be

 

1N-2♣; 2♦-?:

 

(...)

3M = GF, 4 M and 5+ OM

...(...)

...3N = suggestion opposite 4 M and 5 OM

......P = 4 M and 5 OM, not slammish

......4♣ = 4 M and 6+ OM, slammish

......4♦ = 4 M and 6+ OM, not slammish

......(...)

...(...)

(...)

4♣ = 5+ S and 5+ H, slammish

4♦ = 5+ S and 5+ H, not slammish

(...).

[raspeball]

Some versions of Smolen use one or both of Responder's 4m rebids on GF 5-5 hands.

 

E.g. the one described here (by Ana Roth? Paul Lavings?), which in a little more detail seems to be

 

1N-2♣; 2♦-?:

 

(...)

3M = GF, 4 M and 5+ OM

...(...)

...3N = suggestion opposite 4 M and 5 OM

......P = 4 M and 5 OM, not slammish

......4♣ = 4 M and 6+ OM, slammish

......4♦ = 4 M and 6+ OM, not slammish

......(...)

...(...)

(...)

4♣ = 5+ S and 5+ H, slammish

4♦ = 5+ S and 5+ H, not slammish

(...).

 

 

This is OK as long as you have another way in your system to show 5-5 majors and game invitational strength.

 

Another way to give responder chance to show more hands is to use responders second bid as transfer as well, one option is (there probably is better structures available):

1nt-2♥

2♠-?

2nt=Transfer to clubs (Both game forcing and invitational plus is possible here)

3♣=Transfer to diamonds (Both game forcing and invitational plus is possible here)

3♦=Transfer to hearts(invitational to game+?)

3♥= 6 card spades, invitational to game/slam

3♠= 5 card spades. Choice of game, or some stronger hands?

3nt=4 card spades, choice of games.

 

You loose the 2nt rebid to show 5 spades balanced and game invitational. But if your system allows, that hand can hand can be shown with normal stayman and rebidding 2 ♠..

[Vampyr]

Yes. That is possible. I think one of the swedish systems ~30 years ago (Super Standard?) used transfers to show 4 card majors.

 

If you use the sequence: 1nt-2♥;2♠-3♥ to show 4 card spades you need to put the 5-5 major hands elsewhere. As you say, stayman is one possibility.

One solution that i have seen is:

1nt-2♣

2♦-3♦=5-5 in major. Game invitational or stronger. But then you loose the natural 3♦ in this sequence.

 

We are simple souls. We just bid 1NT-4♣ for 5-5 majors.

[nullve]

Yes, transfer rebids are probably close to standard, anyway, among pairs willing to play 1N-2N as some sci-fi [P?p?]uppet.

 

Then one option that solves the related problem of finding the 5-3 OM fit when Opener has 5 OM and Responder has 5 M and 3 OM, is:

 

1N-[2M-1]; 2M-?:

 

(...)

3m-1 = GF, 4+ m

3♦(M=♠) = INV+, 5+ H [if you wish]

3M-1 = a) INV+, 6+ M b) CoG w/ 5 M and 2 OM

...3M = would reject the invite in a)

......P = a) with INV values only

......3N = b)

......other = a) with GF values

...3N = accepts game opposite a), to play opposite b)

...other = accepts game opposite a), wants to play 4 M opposite b)

3M = CoG, 5 M and 3 OM

(...)

3N = CoG, 4 M and 2 OM

(...)

[glen]

Another design with 2NT forces 3♣, then

 

3♦: asks for five card major, 3♥=no, 3♠=five, 3NT=five ♥s

3♥: asks in spades, 3♠=four, 3NT=fewer than 4, 4♠=five

3♠: 3 ♥s and two or fewer ♠s

3NT: 4 ♠s and 3 ♥s

 

3♦ - 3 ♥ - 3♠ shows four ♥s

 

With 3 ♥s and two or fewer ♠s bid either 3♦ or 3♠

With 3 ♠s and two or fewer ♥s bid either 3♦ or 3♥

 

There are designs where 2NT only asks for five in one of the majors, like:

 

2NT asks if five ♠s, 3♣=no

After 2NT-3♣:

 

3♦: asks if four ♠s, 3♥=no

3♠: asks for five ♥s, 3NT=no

3NT: 4 ♥s

 

3♦ - 3 ♥ - 3♠ asks for five ♥s, 3NT=no

 

With this second structure there can be sequences where opener has responder play the major suit contract

[raspeball]

Thank you for many good suggestions and correction of ideas that don't work!

I think my prefered variant so far is something like this:

 

2nt= Forces 3♣. Can be used if responder want to play 3♣.

If responder is game-forcing he has one of the following hands:

* 4-3 in the majors.

* One 4 card major suit(0-2 in the other) (Changed from previous version where this showed 3 card major and 0-2 in the other).

* 3-3 in the majors.

 

With all these hands responder can show his hand, and opener does not have to reveal more than wheter he has support for responder.

 

Hands with 4-4 in the majors bid 2♣ initially. Hands with one 3 card major and 0-2 in the other have to find another way to bid their hand (If responder have singleton or void in a major it could be a good idea to show the short suit instead).

 

Responses:

 

1nt-2nt

3♣?

3♦=4-3/3-4 in majors. Responses as suggested by nullve (But giving opener some freedom with how he wants to bid hands with 5 card majors).

3♥=4 card spades. Not interested in hearts.

3♠=4 card hearts. Not interested in spades

3nt=3-3 in majors (And normally 5 card+ in a minor)

 

I now think that it is better for responder to bid 3♥/3♠ with 3 card in the suit bid, and 0-2 in the unbid major. This wrongsides if you have a 5-3 fit (Or good 4-3 fit with weakness in the other major). But it reduces the chance that the opponent have a useful lead directing double if we end up in 3nt. The structere then becomes:

 

 

1nt-2nt

3♣?

3♦=4-3/3-4 in majors. Responses as suggested by nullve (But giving opener some freedom with how he wants to bid hands with 5 card majors).

3♥=3 card hearts. 0-2 spades.

3♠=3 card spades. 0-2 hearts

3nt=3-3 in majors (And normally 5 card+ in a minor)

 

 

If then also using transfer extentions that forces to game, a hand with only 4 card support can be shown there.

I like:

1nt-2♥

2♠-?

... 3♠=5 card ♠. Choice of games

... 3nt=4 card ♠. Choice of games (In the structure I am thinking about it will most likely only be 4♠ and 2♥)

[raspeball]

I now think that it is better for responder to bid 3♥/3♠ with 3 card in the suit bid, and 0-2 in the unbid major. This wrongsides if you have a 5-3 fit (Or good 4-3 fit with weakness in the other major). But it reduces the chance that the opponent have a useful lead directing double if we end up in 3nt. The structere then becomes:

 

 

1nt-2nt

3♣?

3♦=4-3/3-4 in majors. Responses as suggested by nullve (But giving opener some freedom with how he wants to bid hands with 5 card majors).

3♥=3 card hearts. 0-2 spades.

3♠=3 card spades. 0-2 hearts

3nt=3-3 in majors (And normally 5 card+ in a minor)

 

 

If then also using transfer extentions that forces to game, a hand with only 4 card support can be shown there.

I like:

1nt-2♥

2♠-?

... 3♠=5 card ♠. Choice of games

... 3nt=4 card ♠. Choice of games (In the structure I am thinking about it will most likely only be 4♠ and 2♥)

 

I think now it is better to use standard puppet after all, like some of you have been telling me for a long time. :)

I found this old conversation link.

The reason this is better, is that you find out at once if opener has 5 card major, leaving responder more room. Showing the 5 cars suit mainly hurts if you were interested in the other major, and have less than 3 card in openers major.

 

The gain is that responder after a normal puppet sequence can show more hands:

The hands with 3-1/1-3 in majors and 5-4/4-5 in the minors were shown by this sequence:

 

3♣ = no 5M

3

♦

= (31)(54)

3

♥

= 4

♠

3

♠

= 4

♥

3N = To Play

3M = 5M

 

The downside offcourse is extra chances for lead directing doubles and more to remember.

 

EDIT:

Still possible to do some fancy stuff if you want, letting opener bid 3♦ with 5 card♥ and 3♥ with 5 card♠.

This allows responder to choose who should be declearer, and also give a cheap slamtry:

 

1nt-2nt

3♦(1)-3♥(2)

 

(1)=5 card ♥

(2)=mild slamtry (1-3-5-4 or 1-3-4-5 ??)

[dokoko]

Many ideas in this thread have some merit in hiding opener's shape but have serious drawbacks for slam purposes.

 

...

 

Still possible to do some fancy stuff if you want, letting opener bid 3♦ with 5 card♥ and 3♥ with 5 card♠.

This allows responder to choose who should be declearer, and also give a cheap slamtry:

 

1nt-2nt

3♦(1)-3♥(2)

 

(1)=5 card ♥

(2)=mild slamtry (1-3-5-4 or 1-3-4-5 ??)

 

We bid 3♦ with 5♠ (and 3♥ with 5♥). This caters for opener having 54 in the majors (which is acceptable as we play) and responder having 42 in the majors (and using 2NT instead of 2♣ to hide information when no 4-4-fit is present).

 

After 1NT-2NT;3♦:

3♥ agrees ♠

3♠ shows 4♥

3NT is to play

 

After 1NT-2NT;3♥:

3♠ puppets to 3NT (to play there or agreeing ♥)

3NT shows 4♠

 

Responder avoids to bid the major which he (might) want to play in.