[NickToll]

I think that the NT range is the major factor here. When playing 15-17 it is possible to remove 5M332s from 1NT and arrange some sequences to handle those hands starting from 1M (e.g., play a simplified Gazzilli - rebid 2♣ over a 1-level response and, if partner is interested, follow with 2NT). On the other hand, when playing 12-14 it seems preferable to open 5M332s with 1NT: otherwise, one has to open 1M and lose the major advantage of the weak notrump - make sure that 1suit bids promise 15+ or unbalanced shape. This in turn has positive effects on the whole 1bids development, that should be taken into account when evaluating results in the long term.

Once decided to include ALL 5M332s into 1NT, 5-3 fits can always be found somehow when the partnership has game values. One method could be let opener reply 2M to Stayman and, as responder, follow with 3OM, 3+ cards in M; now opener will bid:

• 3NT with just four; here responder may pass or follow with 4m (natural slam try), 4M (mild slam try with a 4-4 fit, stronger than 4M at the previous round but still not forcing), other bids strong slam tries with a 4-4 fit
  
• any other bid with five (cue-bids or whatever you prefer)

No luxury of this kind is allowed for in partscore or invitational sequences, with the obvious exception of 1NT - 2♣; 2M - 2NT; 3M (5332, maximum).

[fromageGB]

 l milne, on 2010-December-05, 13:09, said:

The major advantage is that partner does not have to worry about you having an intermediate balanced hand in other auctions, I find. Now 1♠-2♣ (GF)-2NT/3NT are both more tightly defined.

Not necessarily. I play 1♠ 2♣ as a not-always-5card and a 2♦ follow up from opener is 14+, and 1♠ 2♥/♦(always 5 GF) 2NT as exactly 15-16 with weaker or stronger openers bidding lower.

 l milne, on 2010-December-05, 13:09, said:

Also, you notice that in this 1M-1NT-2♣ auction you end up playing 2♥+ when your partner doesn't have 8+HCP? This is instead of playing a fairly likely 1NT contract on your misfit. I don't know how many matchpoint sessions you play, but your opponents will be thanking you for not having to defend more 1NT contracts.

Yes, I agree with you on this. It is as I see it the downside, but more than outweighed by the upsides of showing a 5 card major when responder is less than game forcing.

 MickyB, on 2010-December-06, 00:06, said:

How can you play in 2D when partner has long diamonds if he has to rebid 2D to show 8+ points?

Yes, if he has less than 8 and long diamonds he rebids 3♦ to play. But this is no worse than would happen if you opened 1NT (assuming you play transfers).

 whereagles, on 2010-December-07, 09:09, said:

You can make a pretty good case for opening 1NT with 5 card majors. You will sometimes lose a major suit fit, the trade-off of giving a good picture of your shape/strengt compensates for that.

I don't agree with your tradeoff, as after 1♠ 1NT you can give an equally good picture of your shape and strength. Better, in fact, as the 5 card major is already defined. For responder to make a forcing response to your 1NT to enable you to show shape, he will have 8+, and therefore after the alternative 1♠ open and a rebid, he can either make an inquiry, or make a better descriptive bid with specific hands.

 whereagles, on 2010-December-07, 09:09, said:

Losing a 5-3 major fit is a problem mainly when responder is weak with support (and passes 1NT), but those hands aren't very common. How do I know that? Because I've been playing a 9-11 1NT with 5 card majors for like 5 years now and I can only remember one occasion where we got a bottom due to that.

That's funny, because many times I open a major and find responder with less than 8 but with support, and our 2M scores better than a 1NT.

[whereagles]

 fromageGB, on 2010-December-17, 10:34, said:

1. I don't agree with your tradeoff, as after 1♠ 1NT you can give an equally good picture of your shape and strength. Better, in fact, as the 5 card major is already defined. For responder to make a forcing response to your 1NT to enable you to show shape, he will have 8+, and therefore after the alternative 1♠ open and a rebid, he can either make an inquiry, or make a better descriptive bid with specific hands.

Well, compare

1NT 2♣
2♠

to, for instance

1♠ 1NT
2♣

In the first case you showed
- 15-17 hcp
- 5332 shape

In the second you showed
- 11-17 hcp
- anything from a normal 54 to a wierd 65 freak

and you still have to see what to do with a bal 15-17 after 1♠-1NT.

How can you say you're giving a good picture in the second case? The first case is WAY more well-defined.

[losercover]

We have played 1NT as 19-21 HCP (no singleton or void) for a long time. That solves the problem with 5 card majors and 15-17 HCP. I am more inclined to open 1NT with any 5 card major than my partner.

The only other adjustment required is PJS by responder with a weak hand, so opener doesn't get passed out in a 3 card minor.

[JLOGIC]

 FrancesHinden, on 2010-December-05, 13:04, said:

*It's often quite hard to tell if the choice of action has gained or lost. I played a match on Wednesday where (in an irregular partnership) I opened 1NT with Axx AKxxx A10 Jxx; partner had K109xx Jxxx KJxx -; we weren't playing particularly sophisticated methods and quite reasonably (IMO) bid 1NT - 2C - 2H - 4H. The other table bid to 6H. 6H seems to almost exactly neutral as an imps contract. At the table 6H was off, so was that a gain or a loss for opening 1NT?

Huh? Seems like a huge slam.

[JLOGIC]

As for the question, I like to use 3C as puppet stayman over 1N. I generally play 4 way transfers and 3D GF minors, 3H/3S shortness with (13)54 so 3C is not that useful as anything (you can play weak minors, inv minors, or 4441 or whatever, all have some use but it's marginal and infrequent). Puppet comes up all the time, so I feel like I get a lot of use out of it. If you play a good version of it you can minimize information leakage on a lot of hands (even hands you'd normally have bid regular stayman with) so that's another big plus.

[fromageGB]

 whereagles, on 2010-December-17, 11:33, said:

Well, compare

1NT 2♣
2♠

to, for instance

1♠ 1NT
2♣

In the first case you showed
- 15-17 hcp
- 5332 shape

In the second you showed
- 11-17 hcp
- anything from a normal 54 to a wierd 65 freak

and you still have to see what to do with a bal 15-17 after 1♠-1NT.

How can you say you're giving a good picture in the second case? The first case is WAY more well-defined.

If 1NT 2♣ 2♠ shows 5 spades, then OK, but we end up in the same contract. But that probably means you can't find other hands.

The balanced 15-17 is no problem. 1♠ 1NT 2♣ 2♦(8+, asking, says nothing about diamonds) 2NT is 15/16, and 3NT is 17+.
And of course the cheapest answer, 2♥, is 12-14.

 whereagles, on 2010-December-17, 11:33, said:

In the second you showed
- 11-17 hcp
- anything from a normal 54 to a wierd 65 freak

Not really, 1♠ 1NT 2♣ is say 12-19. Responder will find out the strength on the next bid.
A 55 or freaker will bid 1♠ 1NT 3♣ if 15/16, or 1♠ 1NT 2♣ 2♦ 3♣(GF) if 17+.

[fbear]

I've agonized over why we can't easily employ a version of 5 card Stayman over 1NT and there are simple versions that lose the chance to bail out at the 2 level with weak hands. But I think the following allows this and isn't too complex. I'd be interested in people's views.

It uses the sequence 1NT-2C-2D-3H/3S which is unnecessary to show both majors if you play a transfer followed by a new suit as forcing as you can transfer to one of them and then bid the other.

1NT-2C-?

2D = Either 5 card major (max) OR denies both 4 and 5 card major
2M = Either 5 card major (min) OR simply 4 card major


1NT-2C-2D-?

2M = To play
2NT = Invitational
3m = natural and forcing
3M = 3+ cards in 'support' of opener's 5 card major if he has one. If Opener hasn't, then he rebids 3NT. 1NT-2C-2D-3H-3S shows a 5 card spade suit. This responder rebid effectively takes the place of what he would have originally done which is bid 3NT.



1NT-2C-2D-2NT-?

3M = 5 card suit (max)


The only situation where a 5-3 fit is 'lost' is when responder only has invitational values and can't rebid anything other than 2NT and opener has a minimum:-

1NT-2C-2M-2NT-Pass

2M could be a 5 card major (min), but with 3 card support and only invitational values responder has to rebid 2NT and there they will play.

[fromageGB]

 fbear, on 2013-September-13, 11:19, said:

It uses the sequence 1NT-2C-2D-3H/3S which is unnecessary to show both majors if you play a transfer followed by a new suit as forcing as you can transfer to one of them and then bid the other.

OK for some people, but I prefer opener to be declarer, as there will be a minor lead round to his longer suits.

Quote

1NT-2C-2D-?
2M = To play

If so then presumably you will not be using transfers to a major when less than invitational? I can't see what advantage this gives you, and it wrong-sides the 2M.

I am not a user of 1NT with 5 card majors, so I cannot know whether this is better than normal methods or not. I prefer finding the 5-3 fits when responder is both invitational and when he is weaker.

[PhilKing]

 fbear, on 2013-September-13, 11:19, said:

1NT-2C-2D-3M = 3M

This leaks masses of information to the hand on lead. Most of the time you end in 3NT having pinpointed your 3-3/3-2 fit.

[fromageGB]

 PhilKing, on 2013-September-13, 13:24, said:

This leaks masses of information to the hand on lead. Most of the time you end in 3NT having pinpointed your 3-3/3-2 fit.

It shows 3+, so is hardly a leak when you can have a 4-3 fit. And as responder also bids 2♣ on practically any hand, less of a leak than 1NT 2♣ promissory and 1NT not-2♣.

[PhilKing]

 fromageGB, on 2013-September-13, 14:19, said:

It shows 3+, so is hardly a leak when you can have a 4-3 fit. And as responder also bids 2♣ on practically any hand, less of a leak than 1NT 2♣ promissory and 1NT not-2♣.

Yeah. Misread a bit, but 3♠ by responder IS a leak, since it pinpoints a doubleton heart.

[DJNeill]

Sorry to be non-scientific, but I agree that not playing 5M's in 15-17 really is painful on many hands where that is hard to show.

As to Puppet Stayman to reveal those, I definitely don't like 2C Puppet Stayman, but I'm neutral about "Puppet Stayman, no idea how to follow up after major(s) shown", which is basically like buying a shiny capgun. A nice bang but you are left with nothing much to show for it. Just figure out how to set a suit as trumps and then RKC after Puppet (and how to quant without a fit). Then you are using a useful convention.

[GreenMan]

Meckwell's 1NT-2NT puppet has great appeal to me; I've started playing it with one partner but we haven't had a chance to try it out yet. Responses:

3♣ no 5cM
3♥/♠ 5

After 3♣, responder with both 4cMs bids 3♦; with one 4cM he bids OM and opener bids game as appropriate.

One big benefit is that opener describes his hand as little as possible. Minimal leaks.

[johnu]

 dicklont, on 2010-December-05, 07:33, said:

Puppet Stayman after 1NT is not popular because you lose stayman with weak hands.
However whith 10+ some play 3♣ as puppet stayman.

Puppet Stayman has never been popular compared to regular Stayman because relatively few people know how to play it and people are used to playing regular Stayman. You definitely can use it with weak hands, just a different class of hands, 5+ diamonds with major suit tolerance. Of course, if you never or almost never have a 5 card major, why play puppet Stayman?

[awm]

Why do you think it's so important to locate these 5-3 major fits? If both hands are balanced, 3nt will often be a better game (especially single dummy where 1nt-3nt is hard to lead against). If responder is unbalanced then pinpointing the shortness is far more valuable (and leaks less info about opener's hand).

[fromageGB]

 fbear, on 2013-September-13, 11:19, said:

1NT-2C-?
2D = Either 5 card major (max) OR denies both 4 and 5 card major
2M = Either 5 card major (min) OR simply 4 card major

I think you can modify this, and it solves most of the problems.

Starting point : 1NT can include a 5 card major (5cM)
Objectives : to find the 5-3 M fits; to be able to use garbage stayman

Responder bids a red suit transfer when 5cM except GF{54} both majors; 2♠ and upwards = normal methods (don't need 2NT natural); otherwise passes when less than invitational unless he has a holding at least 333x and fancies garbage stayman. Otherwise when invitational (Inv) or better (GF), or with garbage, starts 2♣.

1NT 2♣ ...
Opener bids :
2♦ = any 5cM or no 4cM
2M = that 4cM (♥ if both ♠ & ♥)

1NT 2♣ 2♦ ...
Responder bids :
Pass = garbage
2M = cheapest 3+cM, Inv only
2NT = no 3cM, Inv only
3♣ = available for minor slam tries or to play or whatever
3♦ = GF request for 5 card major
3M = GF 4cM in a {54} both majors hand (Smolen)
3NT = to play, no 3cM

1NT 2♣ 2M ...
Responder bids are natural, though of course you can do other things :
Pass = garbage
2NT or 2♠ (4cM over 2♥) = Inv only
3NT or 4M or 3♠ (4cM over 2♥) = GF

After 1NT 2♣ 2♦ 2M ...
Opener bids :
Pass = that 5 card major, min, to play
2♠ over 2♥ = 5cM min, for pass or convert to 2NT
2NT = no M, min
3♠ over 2♥ = 5cM max, for pass or convert to 3NT
3NT = no M, max
4M = max 5cM

After 1NT 2♣ 2♦ 3♦ ...
Opener bids :
3M = 5cM
3NT = no M

This does give you the invitational but game denied 5-3 fits played at the 2 level, which is better than some methods. This modification also helps in right-siding. Of course there is minor "information leakage" as called by some, but called "finding the right contract rather than potting an inferior one for a poor MP score" by others.

[Free]

In one of my partnerships we play regular Stayman and use 3♦ as a further inquiry to figure out about a 5 card M (or 4 card OM). An extra advantage is that 1NT-2♣-2♦-3♦ can be used to show a GF hand with 5-5M (rightsiding the contract) and allows us to use 1NT-2♥-2♠-3♥ as INV with 5-5M.
You can overload 1NT-2♣-2X-3♣ to cover for the loss of the natural 3♦ rebid.

[RGranville]

There are various ways to find 5-3 major suit fits after a 1NT opening, but I don't like using 2♣ as Puppet Stayman, since this prevents responder from making that bid on weak hands.

A much better approach is to exploit the rule that the 2♣ bidder won’t have a 5 card major unless he has 4 cards in the other major. For example, the sequence 1NT-2♣-2♠-3♥ tends to be unused at present. The following shows how most 5-3 major suit fits can be found if responder has invitational values. There’s no simple way to find a 5-3 spade fit when responder has invitational values and opener is minimum.

Opener replies to Stayman as usual, with 2♥ or 2♠ showing either 4 or 5 cards in the bid major.

Rebids after 1NT – 2♣ – 2♥
2♠ 4+ card spade suit. If responder has enough for game, he might have interest in a 5-3 heart fit.
2NT Denies 4 spades, therefore invitational with interest in a 5-3 heart fit.
3NT Denies 4 spades, therefore interest in a 5-3 heart fit.

Rebids after 1NT – 2♣ – 2♥ – 2♠
2NT Minimum, not 4 spades, 4 or 5 hearts. Responder bids 3♥ if he wants to play in a 5-3 heart fit.
3♣ Maximum, not 4 spades, 4 or 5 hearts. Responder bids 3♥ if he wants to play in a 5-3 heart fit.
3♠ Minimum, 4 spades.
4♠ Maximum, 4 spades.

Rebids after 1NT – 2♣ – 2♠
2NT Invitational with 4 hearts.
3♥ Interest in a 5-3 spade fit.
3NT No interest in a 5-3 heart fit.

[fromageGB]

 RGranville, on 2013-September-15, 15:11, said:

There’s no simple way to find a 5-3 spade fit when responder has invitational values and opener is minimum.

That's 50% of the hands the OP is concerned about. So how is your suggestion "A much better approach"? The OP method does work, and is simple.

Quote

Rebids after 1NT – 2♣ – 2♥ – 2♠
2NT Minimum, not 4 spades, 4 or 5 hearts. Responder bids 3♥ if he wants to play in a 5-3 heart fit.

Assume responder is invitational. If opener has a 5 card suit you are playing at the 3 level when an invitation is declined, compared with the 2 level in the modified OP's idea, and moreover you are forcing to 3NT, or 3♥ on a 4-3 fit, if opener has only 4 hearts.

If you are therefore saying that responder can only bid 2♠ if he has a GF hand, then not only are you always failing to find the 5-3 fit in opener's spades when responder is invitational, you also fail when opener has hearts.

I think perhaps you may like to rethink.