[Free]

Your partner opens 2NT (20-21) and you hold the following hand:

Scoring: MP

---

Your choices are simple:
Pass (wtp?)
3♣ is a standard version of Puppet Stayman (opener rebids 3M with a 5 card M, 3NT without a 4 card M, 3♦ otherwise)
3NT to play, a gamble hoping for some support in ♦
4S showing both minors without slam interest (so you'll play 5m in your best minor fit)

This is MATCHPOINTS. Do you pass like the field will probably do, or do you like something fancy?

[gwnn]

pass, wtp? what's wrong with doing what the field does? it's not like they're rotten lepers who need to be avoided.

[Gerben42]

IMHO, Pass IS something smart here

[dake50]

This is one of the unanswerable wins for 1C force. Pass and hope okay.

[655321]

Pass, of course.

This will, in the long run, earn you matchpoints from:
(1) The bad cardplayers in the field who don't take all their tricks in 2NT, and
(2) The bad bidders in the field, who don't know this hand is a pass of 2NT.

[jdonn]

655321, on Mar 29 2008, 08:34 AM, said:

Pass, of course.

This will, in the long run, earn you matchpoints from:
(1) The bad cardplayers in the field who don't take all their tricks in 2NT, and
(2) The bad bidders in the field, who don't know this hand is a pass of 2NT.

Regarding 1, I always think it's funny that everyone talks about not taking chances in the bidding so they can gain from this group, but no one ever seems to admit to being a member of it...

This was in no way a comment about you, who I have never even seen play, just a general comment

[gwnn]

dake50, on Mar 29 2008, 03:24 PM, said:

This is one of the unanswerable wins for 1C force.

I love strong ♣.

Let me answer your "win".

-in many variants of strong♣ you are forced to the 2 level already (1♣-1♦; 2NT), so no win

-consider the amazing amount of lead directional space you give up by opening your hand 1♣ and not 2NT. Remember, the significant majority of 2NT auctions end at 3NT. This is even more true for "1♥ Kokish/2nd force" players (i.e. 1♣-1♦; 1♥-1♠; 1NT=19-21 balanced". Basically you let them double for any lead.

-the big advantage of strong ♣ over std methods in case of a 20 hcp balanced hand is that responder can set GF and they can hunt for slam much more easily. (albeit we're talking about tricky slams here, like 20+10 hcp slams, where both parties need to know of the other's relatively slight extras for slam, which can get hard to find even in strong ♣ - at least in std methods opener's strength is well-limited)

[Trinidad]

gwnn, on Mar 29 2008, 12:31 PM, said:

dake50, on Mar 29 2008, 03:24 PM, said:

This is one of the unanswerable wins for 1C force.

I love strong ♣.

Let me answer your "win".
[]
-consider the amazing amount of lead directional space you give up by opening your hand 1♣ and not 2NT. Remember, the significant majority of 2NT auctions end at 3NT. This is even more true for "1♥ Kokish/2nd force" players (i.e. 1♣-1♦; 1♥-1♠; 1NT=19-21 balanced". Basically you let them double for any lead.

After the auction: 1♣-1♦; 1♥-1♠; 1NT it is not very likely to get to 3NT, since for most players 1♠ will be a double negative showing 0-3/4. Thus, the strong NT hand will usually end up playing 1NT (or either of them will play 2x).

Furthermore, the only lead directional doubles that are available are the double of 1♦ and 1♠. Most players will use the double of 1♦ for something conventional which leaves a lead directional double of 1♠. This is a double in a situation where the doubler already had the opportunity to bid 1♠ on the previous round. So a lead directing double of 1♠, while far from impossible, is not very likely.

Of course, it is a big advantage for the defense to have a lead directing double of 1♠ available when it does occur, but in general that advantage will not outweigh the drawback of having to take one more trick on defense to get the contract down.

Rik

[gwnn]

it's still a good thing to know that partner has good hearts but didn't want to bid them on the 1 level.

and the "they can't double 1♦ for a diamond lead" sounds wrong. they can double it for something else and opening leader will lead a little more successfully.

[jdonn]

Jlall, on Mar 29 2008, 04:14 PM, said:

I would bid 3N at imps but pass at MP. Going for an extra undertrick is very costly at MP but doesn't matter much at imps.

Wow really 3NT at imps?

We make 7 or fewer tricks: lose 2
We make 8 tricks: lose 5
We make 9 or more tricks: win 6

These aren't exactly monster odds in favor of bidding a game that will go down more often than not. I know there are other factors, like if you pass and they know dummy is broke they might lead better, or you might make fewer tricks in 3NT than in 2NT by trying to make it. But it's hard to compute all that. Ultimately this really seems like a good idea taken too far to me.

[jkdood]

Vul at imps the payoff to bid 3n seems much better than nv, and gives Justin's suggestion more merit - maybe 3n vul at imps is a reasonable posit.

[dake50]

To gwnn,

Of course if you posit the 1C system is foolish enough to get just as high as 2N openers, you're correct: NO advantage. That non-sequitor always holds --if I, an effigy inventor, say what happens to a superior method then it won't be superior.
The fact is lower can/should be an advantage v high catching zip. I've heard the same type argument for Flannery has slam tries after 2N response(eg.) wins since other methods WON'T HAVE SLAM TRIES! Astounding!

I assure you my partnership ends in 1NT. Maybe 2-suit if long suit responder. At least 1 trick lower than 2NT auction can stop. Further GF values are still found; slams are still explored. The higher level opener cannot match up unless it is *NOT* FACING A BUST.

That IS an unanswerable (not by an effigy) gain for 1C force. Maybe you know some 1C force methods which choose to give this advantage back, but it their system MIS-choice not inherent in 1C-force.

[gwnn]

dake50, on Mar 30 2008, 04:46 PM, said:

To gwnn,

Of course if you posit the 1C system is foolish enough to get just as high as 2N openers, you're correct: NO advantage. That non-sequitor always holds --if I, an effigy inventor, say what happens to a superior method then it won't be superior.
The fact is lower can/should be an advantage v high catching zip. I've heard the same type argument for Flannery has slam tries after 2N response(eg.) wins since other methods WON'T HAVE SLAM TRIES! Astounding!

I assure you my partnership ends in 1NT.  Maybe 2-suit if long suit responder.  At least 1 trick lower than 2NT auction can stop. Further GF values are still found; slams are still explored. The higher level opener cannot match up unless it is *NOT* FACING A BUST.

That IS an unanswerable (not by an effigy) gain for 1C force. Maybe you know some 1C force methods which choose to give this advantage back, but it their system MIS-choice not inherent in 1C-force.

have you read my post or only the part "1♣-1♦;2NT" ?

an unanswerable win should mean a method is superior to another system in case of every possible (or absolutely vast majority) pair of hands

consider the following few situations and imagine you have a balanced 21 count...

1♣-2♠-p-p;
?

1♣-1♠-p-3♠
?

1♣-p-1♦-X

1♣-p-1NT (whatever this means)

1♣-1♠-1NT (whatever this means)

1♣-X-1NT (whatever this means)

1♣-p-1♦-p;
1♥-X

[xcurt]

Why not bid 3C and pass partner's response.

If partner bids 3NT he has at least 7 minor suit cards, so hopefully either we can get to the long diamonds in dummy directly or using the CT as a late entry.

If partner bids 3M we're probably better off in the 5-2 than we would be in 2NT.

If partner bids 3D we can pass and hopefully get +110 against a minus score in 2NT, or get +130 against +120.

[dake50]

gwnn,
Bust opposite 2N IS AN UNANSWERABLE WIN for 1C force. Try to find 0-4hcp hands where "the vast majority" (= gwnn test) is not a win by staying a trick lower. So that meets the gwnn criteria for 'unaswerable win'.

[benlessard]

Quote

I love strong ♣.

Let me answer your "win".

-in many variants of strong♣ you are forced to the 2 level already (1♣-1♦; 2NT), so no win

-consider the amazing amount of lead directional space you give up by opening your hand 1♣ and not 2NT. Remember, the significant majority of 2NT auctions end at 3NT. This is even more true for "1♥ Kokish/2nd force" players (i.e. 1♣-1♦; 1♥-1♠; 1NT=19-21 balanced". Basically you let them double for any lead.

-the big advantage of strong ♣ over std methods in case of a 20 hcp balanced hand is that responder can set GF and they can hunt for slam much more easily. (albeit we're talking about tricky slams here, like 20+10 hcp slams, where both parties need to know of the other's relatively slight extras for slam, which can get hard to find even in strong ♣ - at least in std methods opener's strength is well-limited)

I prefer to play 1nt with them making a lead directing X or an overcall then to play 2nt with no lead directing or no overcall.

In many strong club system you will be able to play 2D on this hand or at least 3m.

For slam strong club is getting an outrageous edge over a natural 2nt.

Try getting to an 5m contract or a 4M (4/3 fit) after a 2nt opening.

Playing natural VS a strong club system the less 18+ balanced hands you get the better.

[xcurt]

xcurt, on Mar 30 2008, 02:42 PM, said:

Why not bid 3C and pass partner's response.

If partner bids 3NT he has at least 7 minor suit cards, so hopefully either we can get to the long diamonds in dummy directly or using the CT as a late entry.

If partner bids 3M we're probably better off in the 5-2 than we would be in 2NT.

If partner bids 3D we can pass and hopefully get +110 against a minus score in 2NT, or get +130 against +120.

OK since nobody followed up I simulated this*. I didn't have strong feelings about the action over 2NT but the original post seemed to beg the question, could we abuse Puppet Stayman this way.

At matchpoints, passing 2NT vs the abuse I mentioned are about even in expected value.**

3NT is almost hopeless, having reasonable chances on less than 10% of opening hands , but 2NT makes frequently enough that bidding 3NT even vulnerable at IMPs is a serious error.

Interestingly, improving the responding hand to xx, xx, QT8xx, J9xx makes passing 2NT a winner at MP, but doesn't really improve your chances of making 3NT. Before I ran this simulation I would have just bid game with that hand at IMPs, not really thinking about it, but now I think thats wrong. The most common scenario is that partner has some hand where the opponents rate to set up four tricks on the lead and then have another trick somewhere.

* Predeal yourself the given hand, assume partner would open 2NT with 20/21 HCP and any balanced pattern, plus any 5422 with no 5 card major; analyze 100 such hands single dummy. I removed a few very sharp hands from the sample such as AKQxx, xx, AKx, Axx.

** Not considering the possibility that part of the field might end somewhere other than 2NT-p or 2NT-3C-3X-p.