Do you bid here?

[AL78]

Auctions that start with 1NT are mostly easy thanks to the limited hand, Stayman, Transfers and other bits and bobs that make slam investigation straightforward. Here is one hand where it is not obvious what to do.

 

Teams:

 

[hv=pc=n&w=shq865d9873cajt85&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=1np]133|200[/hv]

 

1NT is 15-17, your call?

[P_Marlowe]

Pass.

 

In a similar situation, I choose Stayman, got lucky, discovered a heart fit, 4H made.

Maybe I had an add. Jack, not that it makes the bid any better.

[DavidKok]

This is a hand that falls outside most standard treatments. Stayman followed by 3m is usually forcing, the hand is too weak for making a game try unless partner happens to have hearts, and most people do not have a way to show both minors to begin with.

 

In standard (maybe with 4-way transfers or some other way to get to 3m) you have to choose between 1NT and 3♣. With 22-24 combined points I think 1NT is fine despite the spade weakness. Plus, the opponents might compete (they are likely to have 9 spades between them), and then we have a descriptive takeout double available. I'd like one spade for this takeout double, but we have enough strength to make up for it. Even with the possibility of spade ruffs I like 1NT better than 3♣ - two extra tricks is a lot, and partner might have spade values that take tricks in 1NT but not in 3♣.

Pass for me.

 

If I was playing Heeman I think I would show both minors to let partner pick between 3♣ and 3♦.

 

As a side note, your partnership tendency to open 1NT with a five card major might influence this decision. If you do that regularly/always that's an extra argument for pass, since you might be forcing us into a misfit opposite 5=3=3=2 when opponents can not even compete.

[Cyberyeti]

I habitually play a weak NT with 1N-2♣-2♠-3♣ as end of auction, this treatment is less attractive in a strong NT context.

 

I could also bid 1N-2♠ weak with one minor or GF with both, and if partner bids 3♣ showing 4 dismonds sign off in 3♦, otherwise play 3♣.

 

Opposite a strong NT you could easily make 5m, but it's very difficult to determine that it's good fast enough.

[AL78]

I decided to pass. Stayman is a complete gamble on finding a heart fit, works beautifully if one exists, could be horrible if it doesn't. The full deal:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sa65432h743dk6c76&w=shq865d9873cajt85&n=sj97ht9daq52ck943&e=skqt8hakj2djt4cq2&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=1nppp]399|300[/hv]

 

6 imps out when opponents made 3NT at the other table played by West. Partner got a spade lead, teammate sitting North led a heart. Evidently North didn't find a diamond lead when in with the ♣K. 3NT can go off with four top losers and the club finesse wrong, but NS only have two opportunities to cash those tricks before declarer has set up nine. Suppose I can put this one down to bad luck.

[DavidKok]

Getting to 3NT by West is interesting. Do you happen to have the auction?

 

It is not your duty to take special action to protect against your teammates' defence.

[AL78]

Getting to 3NT by West is interesting. Do you happen to have the auction?

 

It is not your duty to take special action to protect against your teammates' defence.

 

[hv=d=e&v=0&b=14&a=1sp1np2np3nppp]133|100[/hv]

 

They were playing a weak NT.

[DavidKok]

And four-card majors, and a version of bridge where 4♥ does not pay extra, it seems.

[Cyberyeti]

And four-card majors, and a version of bridge where 4♥ does not pay extra, it seems.

 

Well 4♥-1 doesn't pay extra :)

 

Also in every version of 4 card majors I know, you open 1♥ with both majors.

[AL78]

Well 4♥-1 doesn't pay extra :)

 

Also in every version of 4 card majors I know, you open 1♥ with both majors.

 

If our teammates failed to find the defence to take 3NT down, they may have failed to take 4♥ down as well. :)

 

Most club players in the UK play some variant of Acol, so the standard opening would be 1♥. It is a feature at this bridge club that strange or poor actions quite often are rewarded (kind of makes me glad I'm playing very infrequently now :)).

[Douglas43]

[hv=d=e&v=0&b=14&a=1sp1np2np3nppp]133|100[/hv]

 

They were playing a weak NT.

 

And they opened 1♠ with 4-4 majors? Seriously???

[AL78]

And they opened 1♠ with 4-4 majors? Seriously???

 

Yes. I went back onto RealBridge and checked the auction again to make sure. Only the player concerned knows why.

[Mariner1]

You should absolutely bid, not pass. Your hand is worth 7 highs plus good distribution count if you can find any fit. So the positives of reaching a game outweigh the risks of bidding by a large margin. Hands such as this is why you should be playing Stayman with hearts first responses.

 

Opponents pass throughout though you can handle any interference easily enough.

 

1N - 2C Stayman

 

2D no major - bid 2 hearts which is a warning to P - if p bids 2 Spades now showing short hearts bid 3 clubs to play.

 

2 Hearts - I raise this to game 4 Hearts.

 

2 Spades - 3 clubs natural invitational (no I do not love this bid but you can't have always have everything)

 

(Note that which is popular is very often the totally wrong bidding methods to be using.}

[mikeh]

You should absolutely bid, not pass. Your hand is worth 7 highs plus good distribution count if you can find any fit. So the positives of reaching a game outweigh the risks of bidding by a large margin. Hands such as this is why you should be playing Stayman with hearts first responses.

 

Opponents pass throughout though you can handle any interference easily enough.

 

1N - 2C Stayman

 

2D no major - bid 2 hearts which is a warning to P - if p bids 2 Spades now showing short hearts bid 3 clubs to play.

 

2 Hearts - I raise this to game 4 Hearts.

 

2 Spades - 3 clubs natural invitational (no I do not love this bid but you can't have always have everything)

 

(Note that which is popular is very often the totally wrong bidding methods to be using.}

In NA, at least, the auction 1N 2C 2S 3C is game forcing. It shows 5+ clubs. If playing 4 way transfers, it will show 6 clubs only with 4 hearts.

 

Since we have a clue that partner is more likely than usual to hold 4 or 5 spades, I think bidding 2C is a huge gamble

 

Edit: playing that as invitational seems generally misdirected. Games and slams are more important than stopping in 3C, especially since opener may be 5=3=3=2 or 4=3=4=2. How on earth do you explore for a high club contract if 3C is unavailable and you are say 1=4=3=5?

[nullve]

Auctions that start with 1NT are mostly easy thanks to the limited hand, Stayman, Transfers and other bits and bobs that make slam investigation straightforward. Here is one hand where it is not obvious what to do.

 

Teams:

 

[hv=pc=n&w=shq865d9873cajt85&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=1np]133|200[/hv]

 

1NT is 15-17, your call?

2♣ (Stayman) followed by

 

• P over 2♦ (risking 2♦ on a 4-2 fit opposite 3325) if Crawling Stayman is not available
  
• 2♥ over 2♦ if Crawling Stayman is available (it should be!)
  
• 4♥ over 2♥
  
• 3N over 2♠ (having avoided a spade lead)
  

.

[Mariner1]

In NA, at least, the auction 1N 2C 2S 3C is game forcing. It shows 5+ clubs. If playing 4 way transfers, it will show 6 clubs only with 4 hearts.

 

Since we have a clue that partner is more likely than usual to hold 4 or 5 spades, I think bidding 2C is a huge gamble

 

Edit: playing that as invitational seems generally misdirected. Games and slams are more important than stopping in 3C, especially since opener may be 5=3=3=2 or 4=3=4=2. How on earth do you explore for a high club contract if 3C is unavailable and you are say 1=4=3=5?

 

-----

 

Sorry, 1N - 2C - 2S - 3C is/should be invitational or you need to change your system agreements.

 

1N - 3C is/should be forcing

 

And some now use the 4 suit transfer to 3 C as in 1N - 2S - 2N/3C depending - any bid other than 3 clubs in forcing (suit is still clubs). So this is used when either weak or very strong and not the middle ground which is the 1N - 2C - a major - 3minor as suggested for invitational).

[mikeh]

-----

 

Sorry, 1N - 2C - 2S - 3C is/should be invitational or you need to change your system agreements.

 

1N - 3C is/should be forcing

 

And some now use the 4 suit transfer to 3 C as in 1N - 2S - 2N/3C depending - any bid other than 3 clubs in forcing (suit is still clubs). So this is used when either weak or very strong and not the middle ground which is the 1N - 2C - a major - 3minor as suggested for invitational).

So how do you bid with say x AQxx xxx AKJxx?

 

For most, at least in NA, one responds stayman, in case we have a heart fit, and then, when partner responds either 2D or 2S, we bid 3C.

 

Btw, my notrump structure is different from ‘standard’ in both of my serious partnerships….in one it’s very non-standard, but in both bidding 3m after opener’s response to stayman is forcing. As is common in expert partnerships, our methods are the result of a lot of (ongoing) work.

 

We do play four suit transfers, but note that it’s standard to play that a transfer to a minor denies a major, and that is the way I play in both.

 

It’s possible to play 1N 2N (diamond transfer) 3C/D 3M as showing 4M with a longer minor. But that’s not standard. Standard is that 3M there shows shortness. That is powerful because it can allow one to avoid a bad 3N and/or reach some nice slams when opener has no wastage in that suit. Meanwhile, playing 1N 2N 3D 3S as natural and forcing requires artificiality for opener should he fit spades….he needs to be able to show spades and a minimum as well as show spades and a maximum…if he has to raise to 4S on all hands with 4S, responder risks getting too high with slam interest when opener is minimum or, conversely, risk missing a slam if he passes and opener is maximum. In addition, opener often won’t know whether or when to bid 3N or to commit to 5D. Also, I’ve never seen anyone use a minor transfer without a 6+ suit.

 

I’m always interested in new structures but you most definitely haven’t persuaded me that playing 1N 2C 2S 3C should be invitational. Btw, telling me that I’m wrong but without explaining the logic behind your approach is not the best way to persuade me.

 

When designing structures such as responses to notrump openings, one needs to develop a coherent approach: one that deals reasonably well with almost all anticipated hand types (although no method deals well with balanced terrible hands…one passes and hopes not to get doubled and the OP hand is tough for our methods). If you want, for example, to convince someone that playing 1N 2C 2x 3C is invitational, you need to address how one shows a forcing hand with 4M and 5+ minor. Also how one bids, say, 3136 with a good hand. And so on.

 

Hey, maybe you’ve thought of something that has escaped me. As I say, I’m always interested in learning. But so far all you’ve done is state conclusions without explaining why you think they’re optimal.

[Douglas43]

It seems to me there are three options for 3♣, weak, invitational, or forcing.

 

In pre-transfer days it was normally weak in the UK, as the only way to run to clubs from a weak NT. Now people transfer, so unless you are one of the few who don't play transfers, I think this can be ruled out as not adding value.

 

That leaves invitational or forcing. Mikeh above makes a number of points about technical merit. I would add that frequency is relevant. You are more likely to have 9/10+ hcp than an 8/ bad 9 count

[Cyberyeti]

It seems to me there are three options for 3♣, weak, invitational, or forcing.

 

In pre-transfer days it was normally weak in the UK, as the only way to run to clubs from a weak NT. Now people transfer, so unless you are one of the few who don't play transfers, I think this can be ruled out as not adding value.

 

That leaves invitational or forcing. Mikeh above makes a number of points about technical merit. I would add that frequency is relevant. You are more likely to have 9/10+ hcp than an 8/ bad 9 count

 

I think weak/strong NT makes a difference here, it definitely has more value opposite weak to play it as sign off as we do, but also 2416 being able to at least explore the 4-4 heart fit before signing off in clubs does help.

 

We have ways of bidding the forcing 4-6s but they can get a little clumsy and show the club suit at the 4 level, but they're a pretty rare hand type opposite a weak NT and confirm values for 4N.

[mycroft]

In my weak NT structure, I play Keri, and we do play 2NT transfer to clubs then 3M as the GF 4-longer hand. But that's one of the reasons Keri is more suited to a weak NT - we play a lot more hands from the "weak side", because in a game auction, there is no "weak side". Yes, transfers have another purpose besides right-siding (which is why Keri also plays transfers), but it is a strong argument. Stayman then minor to show GF "other major + long minor" is a right-siding tool.

 

I've played Stayman-then-minor as invitational (and not promising a major) for several years. It worked quite well. But it's just less efficient, in a NA-style strong NT system, than Mike's (and ACBL standard) style. Note: In Keri, because 2♣ *isn't* Stayman (it isn't even asking, it's telling), 2♣ then 3m is straight-up invitational. But again, "plays more hands from [responder]".

 

Also, "invitational", in a minor, means what exactly? To me, it means "if this suit is one-loser, we make 3NT. If not, we don't." It definitely doesn't mean "go on good 16, let's play 3m instead of 2NT on a bad hand". And a decent minor transfer system, where you can superaccept below game to say "I have enough fillers for you in the trump suit such that, if you have that hand, the suit is one-loser at best", means that there's no need for a specific invitational sequence. So, use it for another, very useful one.

[akwoo]

I've played a system over mini NT (10-12) where 1N-3C(*)-3D-3M shows the 6C+4M hand. Here, 3C is clubs GF or diamonds weak, so 3D is 100% required. It does have a way to show clubs invitational. (The whole idea of the system is that most bids are GF with the suit bid or weak with the next suit up, with invitations mixed into various sequences.)

 

We had a big win once where 1N-2D-2H-3H showed 6D+4H and we got out in 4H in a Moysian while everyone else was down 5 top tricks in spades in 3N.

 

With the given hand, the bidding sequence 1N-2C-2S-3C shows a weak 3-suiter without spades (that hates NT enough to risk the 3 level). (You would pass after 1N-2C-2D or 1N-2C-2H.)

[Mariner1]

try this:

 

A. 2 ♠ -> 3♣ if opener has a good fit and 1N bids 2N without.

 

B. 2N transfers to 3♦ if the opener has a good fit and bids 3♣ without.

 

To stop with a weak hand the responder either passes if NT bid their suit or they bid it themselves to end the auction.

 

If responder wants to pursue the auction they bid higher than their transfer suit which should be used for either showing controls or low-level asking bids as agreed upon in partnership.

 

The ability to do the above is why 1N - 2♣ and then responding bidding either - 3♣ / ♦ should be intermediate.

 

-----

 

Now all 3 types of hands can be handled without a lot of confusion. And there are more possible actions should 4th seat enter the auction.

 

-----

 

A. & B. can be reversed and after 2S or 2N the 1N opener can bid the transfer suit without the fit and the intermediary suit with a good fit. Then the responder can sign off and become declarer by bidding their suit or bid higher if desired. Both methods have their +/- levels for consideration.

 

 

mariner1

[mikeh]

try this:

 

A. 2 ♠ -> 3♣ if opener has a good fit and 1N bids 2N without.

 

B. 2N transfers to 3♦ if the opener has a good fit and bids 3♣ without.

 

To stop with a weak hand the responder either passes if NT bid their suit or they bid it themselves to end the auction.

 

If responder wants to pursue the auction they bid higher than their transfer suit which should be used for either showing controls or low-level asking bids as agreed upon in partnership.

 

The ability to do the above is why 1N - 2♣ and then responding bidding either - 3♣ / ♦ should be intermediate.

 

-----

 

Now all 3 types of hands can be handled without a lot of confusion. And there are more possible actions should 4th seat enter the auction.

 

-----

 

A. & B. can be reversed and after 2S or 2N the 1N opener can bid the transfer suit without the fit and the intermediary suit with a good fit. Then the responder can sign off and become declarer by bidding their suit or bid higher if desired. Both methods have their +/- levels for consideration.

 

 

mariner1

 

 

There are many excellent structures over strong 1N. Some pretty good ones over weak as well, but strong notrump tends to lead somewhat more to game and slam situations than does the weak variety. This, and the higher chance that the hand belongs to the opps after a weak notrump, suggests that one should play different methods

 

As an example, in my current most serious partnership we play extended transfers over 14-16 and a relay method, with lots of preemptive alternatives, over weak.

 

For us, 1N (14-16) 2C 2D 2H shows an invitational hand with 5+ spades (rarely more than 5) and 1N 2C 2D 2S is either a balanced invite in notrump (with at least one 4 card major) or an invitational hand with 4S and longer hearts

 

There’s a lot more, of course. We have quite a few pages of system notes just for 1N, which is either 11-13 or 14-16.

 

I think it categorically wrong to state that one ‘should’ play any particular method. Furthermore the meaning to be ascribed to any particular sequence has to depend on where it fits within the rest. We’re an imp partnership. While we’ve played and will in the future play some mps, we only do so when there is no good imp event available. That means that our focus is on games and slams when we open strong, and we have very detailed, high memory load agreements.

 

Your suggestion that 1N 2N transfers to clubs and that opener bids 3C with no fit and 3D otherwise clashes with a currently widely played approach in which 2S is either any hand with clubs or an invite in notrump, with no major. We play something similar to that, but include invitational diamond hands as well, because other sequences don’t handle those very well for us.

 

This ‘standard’ expert treatment is extremely powerful, not so much because of clubs but because when, as is more common, responder is inviting in notrump, the opponents are in the dark as to opener’s major holding. This often leads to an unfortunate, for the defence, lead.

 

A simple example: you hold Q10xx Q10xx Axx xx

 

You’re on lead v 3N.

 

On one auction, Lho used stayman and bid 2N (not promising nor denying a major) over opener’s 2S bid.

 

So you lead a heart which may or may not work but it’s surely usually going to be better than a spade

 

At the other table LHO bid 2S, either clubs or invitational in notrump, denying a major. Opener bids 3C, showing a maximum, and responder bid 3N.

 

You can’t infer that partner has nothing in spades…a double would show at least a decent 5 card suit so he’d pass with AJxx or the like.

 

Your lead

 

It’s easy to see that either major might be right or a disaster. The opps don’t have extra hcp…they had an invitational auction. So blowing a trick or even a tempo on opening lead may cost a game swing.

 

Thus any method that uses 2S as you suggest has better deliver significant benefits to offset the significant costs

 

All too often players fall in love with a pet sequence because it solves a problem, but they either don’t know about other, better, methods or they don’t think carefully enough about how their

gadget fits into a coherent whole.

[Mariner1]

Since I am recommending one method which is in opposition to some other "Popular" methods then I pretty much am generally opposed to those methods though I will play some of them for partnership harmony.

 

BTW, in bidding just because it is "Popular" definitely does not mean it is the best horse to be tangling your spurs on.

 

------

 

"For us, 1N (14-16) 2C 2D 2H shows an invitational hand with 5+ spades (rarely more than 5) and 1N 2C 2D 2S is either a balanced invite in notrump (with at least one 4 card major) or an invitational hand with 4S and longer hearts."

 

Neither case interferes with how I prefer to play/recommend the minor suit transfers and intermediate minor holdings be bid.