[olien]

I'm trying to find what people think is the best NT structure to be played opposite an 11+-14 NT. Also, where might a find a possible summary of this structure?

Also, I've read about heeman recently, and want to get people's opinion of it. Memory is no real issue.

I have read up on Keri, and think Heeman is more playable, but maybe I am wrong. So if your opinion is different, please let me know.

Thanks

[hrothgar]

I'm very fond of the Scanian response system as documented in "Notrump Bidding: The Scanian Way"

[MickyB]

I looked at various structures a while back, including the ones you have mentioned and some others (Puppet Stayman, Two-Way Stayman, and others less well known, e.g. 2C as hearts, 2D as spades, as played by arguably the top theorist in England), but I am yet to find anything that works better than Stayman and Transfers, preferably with some kind of Transfer Extensions. I don't think your goals over a weak NT are that different to over a strong NT - if 1NT was 8-11 then I might think again!

[olien]

hrothgar, on 2010-November-09, 15:26, said:

I'm very fond of the Scanian response system as documented in "Notrump Bidding: The Scanian Way"

I haven't been able to find anything outlining this online. Could you maybe give a summary? or message me with one?

Thanks

[Flameous]

I think Heeman is great, only real drawback is the loss of garbage stayman. (Considering that many nonexperts don't play it, it would be better to just teach heeman to everyone )

However, I value my garbage stayman quite much, so I play just standard stayman and transfers. Especially with weaker range.

If your NT openings are strictly balanced, you could benefit from transfer+retransfer structure, I built a really good one I liked but it has the problem indeed that it gets rather messed up with (42)(52) NT openings. (Always when you could hold 2 doubletons)

Now that I play in one partnership 12-15NT which could be short in D, and in other 10-12 nonvul which could be almost anything, I have no use for the structure. I can send it though if you are interested.

I have only taken slight overview of Keri, but I don't think it had that many advantages.

[Gerben42]

I'm prejudiced but I like condensed transfers (see link in signature).
And although I was sceptical at first, I found that with a pick-up partner, forcing Stayman makes strong hands easier to bid.

Funny story from tonight:

West North East South

1NT (Pass) 2♦ (Double)
Redouble (Pass)

I was West, and when it was East's turn, North (!) asked if it was forcing Stayman. I then said that she should wait until it is her turn again... South, however, wasn't paying attention on his first try, apparently and had assumed 2♦ was a transfer. On his second turn, he was kinda endplayed into passing. 2♦xx just made and 3NT would have failed

BTW for the story, it was irrelevant if 2♦ was "condensed" or "forcing Stayman", you couldn't tell from pds hand.

[NickRW]

MickyB, on 2010-November-09, 15:31, said:

...I don't think your goals over a weak NT are that different to over a strong NT...

True - or at least mostly true - and assuming that the opener is in 1st or 2nd seat. Weak NT opposite a passed hand benefits from lots and lots of ways of escaping and inviting - but there isn't much room for slammy and GF auctions - the latter of which at least still figures in the picture opposite a 3rd/4th strong NT.

Nick

[dake50]

Play 4xM.
Now 1NT is intended to preempt Majors and needs little reserved for M-exploring.
Much allowed for various minor bids, jump minor bids, delayed minor bids.
minor-game/slam OR 3NT answered well.

[straube]

The nice thing about NT structures is that "what is best" is pretty murky. 1N is preemptive and one has to choose between allocating space for sign offs, GI and slam exploration.

Plugging my structure again...


2C...stayman promising a major
.....2D-none
..........2H-majors, p/c
..........2S-GI 5 spades, says nothing about hearts
..........2N-GI (could be 4S/5H with bad hearts)
..........3C-puppets 3D to show various 4M/5m patterns
..........3D-4S/5H GI
..........3H-4-1-3-5 or 4-1-2-6 slammish
..........3S-1-4-3-5 or 1-4-2-6 slammish
..........3N-likely both majors
..........4C-4-2-1-6
..........4D-2-4-1-6
.....2H-four hearts
..........2S-GI 5 spades
..........2N-GI 4 spades
..........3C-puppets to 3D to show 4 spades and unspecified shortness
..........3D-size ask with heart fit
..........3H-4-1-3-5 or 4-1-2-6
..........3S-4-3-1-5 or 4-2-1-6
..........3N-spade splinter!
..........4m-splinter
.....2S-four spades
..........similar to hearts

2D...transfer, 5 cards
......2S-GI, artificial
......2N-GF with a minor.
...........3C-no heart fit
.................3D-short spade
.................3H-3-5-4-1
.................3S-3-5-1-4
.................3N-no shortness or not slamming
.................4C-2-6-4-1
.................4D-2-6-1-4
...........etc. with heart fit
.....3C-GF, 4 spades
..........3D-no fit, asks shortness
.................3H-4-5-3-1
.................3S-4-5-1-3
.................3N-no shortness or not slamming
......3D-5 clubs
......3H-5 diamonds
......3S-self splinter
......3N-true COG (likely 5H332)
......4m-self splinter

2H-transfer
......2N-GF with a minor
......3C-GF with four hearts
......3D-GI+ with 5/5 in the majors
......3H-five clubs
......3S-five diamonds

2S-size ask
......2N-weak
......3C-strong
...........P-club bust
...........3D-short club, 3+M and 4+D
.................suits are bid up the line until a fit is found
...........3H-balanced slam try
...........3S-club slam try

2N-puppet stayman, usually not slammish
......3C-not 4333
..........3D-four hearts
..........3H-four spade
..........3S-1-3-(54)
......3D-unspecified 4333
...........3H-four spades
...........3S-four hearts
......3M-5 of major

3C-transfer
......3H-5/5 minors
......3S-diamond slam try

3D-short diamonds, 3+M and 4+C
.....suits bid up the line until a fit is found

3H-short hearts, 3+S and 4+m
.....3S-shows 4S
.....4S-shows 5S

3S-short spades, 4H and 4+m

just about any time responder has shown shortness before 3N, a bid of 4C by either partner announces that a fit has been found and strongly invites slam. So 1N-3H, 4C-4D, 5C would show that opener is strongly interest in a club slam.

Gerber and Texas

General rule....showing shortness shows interest in at least the 5-level.
.
0

[Cascade]

I like the structure that I usually play although I can't claim that it is best. There are certainly some weaknesses.

It is based on Stayman, 4-suit transfers and shortage showing bids at the three-level

2♣ Stayman

Usually balanced (no singleton) hands but includes all five-five in majors. Also includes invitational hands without a major. Can be seeking a five-three major fit.

Responses are standard. In addition 3♥/♠ show good maximums with a five-card major and 3♣/♦ show some maximum 4441 hands.

2Major rebids over 2♦ are weak garbage style - 2♥ can be 4=4

2♠ rebid over 2♥ is forcing and shows four spades

2NT rebid shows any invite and does not necessarily promise a major (some auctions it denies one)

3♣ Is a balanced slam try (without a fit in opener's major). Opener shows controls then we explore for a fit.

3♦ Is asking for a five-card major or a three-card major. We start with Stayman with 5-3 in the majors

3♥ over 2♦ is five-five in the majors invitational

3♠ over 2♦ is five-five in the majors GF

Raise is invitational

3 other Major is (balanced) slam try with a fit

3NT is to play

4♣/♦ are splinters over a major and show 5-5 Major hands

2♦/♥/♠/NT Transfers

After a transfer responder's new suit shows a shortage as a springboard for slam and to help in choice of games. Exception after a minor suit transfer the other minor is natural. Jump new suits are voids.

3♣/♦/♥/♠

These show four (or more in the case of a minor) cards in the suit bid and a singleton or void in the suit of the same rank.

Opener can:

raise with a fit - cue the shortage with a great raise
show a stopper for no trumps
explore for a fit in another suit

Higher Responses

At the four-level we play Gerber and Transfers.

4♠ is both minors with no slam interest.

[the hog]

I prefer Keri over both a weak and a strong NT.

[Zelandakh]

I've designed lots of NT structures. Best is dependant to some extent on what drives the player - do you want the most accurate system for common hand types, bids to show every hand type, the ability to stay low, maximum preemption, easy to remember, Opener or responder to play, etc? - and also on what hand types are included - 5M332, 5422, 6m332, 4441, etc. Almost all structures used at the highest level have some advantages over alternatives. There is also scope for some methods not played at the highest level to have advantages. One of the more comprehensive systems is the ETM weak/mini NT structure, but Keri, 4/5-way transfers, double barelled Stayman and lots of other schemes have elements that might appeal. And I play something different from all of these; but what is best for me may not be best for you!

[MickyB]

NickRW, on 2010-November-09, 19:42, said:

True - or at least mostly true - and assuming that the opener is in 1st or 2nd seat. Weak NT opposite a passed hand benefits from lots and lots of ways of escaping and inviting - but there isn't much room for slammy and GF auctions - the latter of which at least still figures in the picture opposite a 3rd/4th strong NT.

Nick

Yup, fair point - surprised I've never seen anyone give up transfers by a passed hand.

Straube's response structure looks pretty cool, I am definitely going to steal at least some of it.

[mikestar13]

Here is my structure. It's based on a 12-14 NT with frequent 5-card majors, but should be adaptable to 11-14.

2♣=Puppet Stayman one level lower.
2♦,2♥=transfers.
2♠=invitational in NT or minors. Rebids are: 2NT=declines NT, responder may bid a minor to invite in that suit. 3♣=accepts NT, declines ♣,
responder may bid ♦ to invite. 3♦=accepts NT or ♣, declines ♦. 3NT=accepts all invitations.
2NT=transfer to ♣, weak or GF.
3♣=transfer to ♦ weak or GF.
3♦=5-5 or better majors, at least invitational.
3♥/3♠=5-5 in minors, short in bid suit, GF.
3NT=to play, no interest in majors.
4♣=Gerber
4♦/4♥=transfers, no slam interest.

This structure sacrifices Garbage Stayman, which may be too high a price to pay. If you seldom or never open a five-card major or are willing to miss some fits, Garbage Stayman can be substituted.

[1eyedjack]

I was surprised to see so many responses in this thread when I woke up. Only because the subject gets rehashed so regularly that most forum regulars would I expect be heartily bored by it. Not that it is an unimportant subject. As the OP is already familiar with keri and heeman, and presumably most of the other industry standards, there may not be much to add.

No doubt a search of these forums would find all of the methods mentioned in this thread, but it has been a while since I plugged my own favourite method which I posted in detail here in 2004, so to save you the effort I link to it here:

http://www.bridgebas...h__1#entry37834

[Cascade]

1eyedjack, on 2010-November-10, 02:57, said:

I was surprised to see so many responses in this thread when I woke up. Only because the subject gets rehashed so regularly that most forum regulars would I expect be heartily bored by it. Not that it is an unimportant subject. As the OP is already familiar with keri and heeman, and presumably most of the other industry standards, there may not be much to add.

No doubt a search of these forums would find all of the methods mentioned in this thread, but it has been a while since I plugged my own favourite method which I posted in detail here in 2004, so to save you the effort I link to it here:

http://www.bridgebas...h__1#entry37834

Very nice method.

[Gerben42]

Quote

Yup, fair point - surprised I've never seen anyone give up transfers by a passed hand.

Straube's response structure looks pretty cool, I am definitely going to steal at least some of it.

I admit that condensed transfers can be space-consuming for slam purposes, but it's practically great for a passed hand at least. And I'm too lazy to learn two things anyway My idea of weak NT is getting to the right game or part score rather than slam anyway.

[Zelandakh]

@mikestar13, I am wondering what you do with an invitational hand with 5 spades and 4 hearts. This is traditionally the problem hand playing puppet Stayman and most schemes that I know of use a 2NT response to handle it. I am wondering how you fix this in order to use 2NT to show clubs.

[straube]

Gerben42, on 2010-November-10, 11:56, said:

I admit that condensed transfers can be space-consuming for slam purposes, but it's practically great for a passed hand at least. And I'm too lazy to learn two things anyway My idea of weak NT is getting to the right game or part score rather than slam anyway.

I've seen some interesting NT structures that used 2-way or 3-way bids that seemed vulnerable to competition.

Take the standard sequence 1N-2C, 2H to show 4S and 4+H with a weak/competitive hand. Now what does this mean?
1N (P) 2C (3C) P P 3H

Most likely the standard meaning is forcing with 4 hearts.

But if you use 1N (P) 2N as your routine GF hand (and many other systems do this), then 1N (P) 2N (3C) and opener can saw off 3C or either partner can bid 3H naturally.

In my structure 1N (P) 2C (3C) 3H would be competitive with 4S and 5H.

How about 1N P 2H (3C) P P 3S? Invitational or competitive?

In mine, clearly competitive because 1N P 2C (3C) P P 3S would show GI spades

Or how about using Smolen to show 5/4 GF?

1N P 2C (3C) P P ?

Do you bid the suit you have or don't have? You probably have to bid naturally here and aren't able to show the 5/4 nature of your hand.

With mine...

1N P 2D (3C) P P 3S would show 5H/4S and be GF. Similarly 1N P 2H (3C) P P 3H would show 5S/4H and be GF.

[Zelandakh]

For those that do not know Condensed Transfers, the link is here

And the ETM method is here