[32519]

The biggest drawbacks for including 5332 hands (5-card major) in your 1NT (or 2NT) come when partner is too weak for either Puppet or Stayman, not when he has a game force.

Any thoughts?

[Vampyr]

32519, on 2012-July-25, 23:32, said:

The biggest drawbacks for including 5332 hands (5-card major) in your 1NT (or 2NT) come when partner is too weak for either Puppet or Stayman, not when he has a game force.

Any thoughts?

No.

[mikestar13]

32519, on 2012-July-25, 23:32, said:

The biggest drawbacks for including 5332 hands (5-card major) in your 1NT (or 2NT) come when partner is too weak for either Puppet or Stayman, not when he has a game force.

Any thoughts?

I think rather the contrary: If responder is weak, 1NT will usually play better than 2M when responder has two cards opposite partner's 5 card major, a little worse, with three cards, and much worse with four cards (but then opponents have enough shape they should be bidding); with a stiff or void in partner's major, some other suit will usually play better than NT if you can find the right suit (no sure thing on weak hands), but 1NT will play much better than opener's major. 1NT will usually play better than the 3M that you will often get to if you open 1M on these hands. If responder is invitational, you can find the fit when opener is going to accept (assuming a well-developed method). So there are losses when responder has good support (4 cards) we break even at worst when responder has three cards, and gain a little or a lot if responder is shorter.

My advice: With 5-3-3-2 (5 card major) in your NT range, open 1NT unless your hand is very suit oriented and your major is so good you don't mind pretending it's a six carder.

I believe this would be reasonable in a world where Puppet Stayman were never invented, not to mention the actual world.

[32519]

mikestar13, on 2012-July-29, 01:35, said:

I think rather the contrary: If responder is weak, 1NT will usually play better than 2M when responder has two cards opposite partner's 5 card major, a little worse, with three cards, and much worse with four cards (but then opponents have enough shape they should be bidding); with a stiff or void in partner's major, some other suit will usually play better than NT if you can find the right suit (no sure thing on weak hands), but 1NT will play much better than opener's major. 1NT will usually play better than the 3M that you will often get to if you open 1M on these hands. If responder is invitational, you can find the fit when opener is going to accept (assuming a well-developed method). So there are losses when responder has good support (4 cards) we break even at worst when responder has three cards, and gain a little or a lot if responder is shorter.My advice: With 5-3-3-2 (5 card major) in your NT range, open 1NT unless your hand is very suit oriented and your major is so good you don't mind pretending it's a six carder.I believe this would be reasonable in a world where Puppet Stayman were never invented, not to mention the actual world.

If the hand belongs to the opponents, how do you parachute out of 1NT after say e.g. a penalty double? Escaping to the 5-card major now is silly. How could 2M in any way play better than 1M?

The question was about the DRAWBACK of including a 5-card major in your 1NT when partner is too weak to respond. Without a trump suit you have no way to stop the opponents running your 2-card suit.

Naming your 5-card major immediately has other advantages. Partner with an otherwise bust hand could easily have a distributional fit with your suit (Law of Total Tricks). Immediately lifting the auction to level-3 (or even level-4) when the hand belongs to the opponents makes it tough for them to enter (especially at favourable vulnerability and the major is ♠). Many players are big fans of Bergen Raises. Including a 5-card major into your 1NT range reduces the use or effectiveness of Bergen Raises.

Since this thread was started I have swung from the anti-Puppet camp to the pro-Puppet camp and now back to the anti-Puppet camp again. The more I see posted on this topic the more convinced I am that Puppet Stayman is just plain dumb! Puppet Stayman must be losing bridge.

To repeat the question, here it is again –

32519, on 2012-July-25, 23:32, said:

The biggest drawbacks for including 5332 hands (5-card major) in your 1NT (or 2NT) come when partner is too weak for either Puppet or Stayman, not when he has a game force.

Any thoughts?

With proper partnership agreements, you should always be able to find game after 1M and 15-17 HCP. The only concern is that the weaker hand may become declarer in 3NT. I cannot see how this poses a problem for Precision players where the weaker hand is often declarer.

[mike777]

yet another thread that claims:


we have super secxret agreements and no issue...sigh

[glen]

RunemPard, on 2012-July-08, 13:17, said:

... Which leads me to ask...why have I never seen anybody play 1NT-2C as puppet in the past? ...

These two were often on vugraph, as recently as June in the USSBC Quarterfinal:
http://usbf.org/docs...lseyStewart.jpg

Richard Pavlicek had this to say:

Quote

Evidence strongly suggests to open 1 NT with hearts but not with spades. Experts have long been aware of the rebid problem after a balanced one-heart opening, but the extreme difference compared to spades is remarkable.

See:
http://www.rpbridge.net/9x41.htm

If 1NT can have 5♥s but not 5♠s, after 1NT-2♣ you can play one of these:

2♦: no 4cM
2♥: 4 or 5♥s, not 4♠s, 2♠ asks
2♠: 4♠s, not 4♥s
2NT: both majors minimum
3♣: both majors maximum

or

2♦: no 4cM
2♥: 4♥s, can have 4♠s
2♠: 4♠s, not 4♥s
2NT: 5♥s minimum
3♣ or 3♥: 5♥s maximum

or

2♦: not 4♥s, can have 4♠s, 2♥ asks
2♥: 4 or 5♥s, not 4♠s, 2♠ asks
2♠: both majors

[32519]

That article on Richard Pavlicek's site has some other very interesting reading "What flavour Two Diamonds?"

Seems like Multi scores the worst (another of my pet hates).

Thanks a million for the link. Much appreciated.

[Zelandakh]

The statistics from RP's site look bogus. If I have a 2♦ opening to show precisely ♦KQJxxx and 2263 shape then I might show a profit on opening 2♦ against not; but it is not a good agreement. You have to factor in all the times you did not open it and were forced to pass or open 3♦ (or whatever). The reverse is true for the multi. Here one uses the 2♦ opening with a broader definition. I am actually surprised to see it gain at all. The benefit from this opening is the freeing up of other openings (primarily 2♥ and 2♠) where you hope to gain often.

Similarly for 5M332 hands. While you might do better on these hands by opening them 1♠, you might also do worse on every other hand that you open 1♠ with. Without comparing the reverse aspects of bidding decisions you are simply creating numbers that have little bearing on the reality of overall results. This applies for everything, even things I agree with like opening light. He says they are a winner but these statistics only say they win on the marginal hands. It could still be that including these hands into opening bids is such a drain on the auctions where we hold a better hand (one where everyone opens) that it is an overall negative. It is impossible to say if you do not analyse all the affected hands. And that is why this kind of analysis is completely worthless.

[glen]

Zelandakh, on 2012-August-06, 07:23, said:

The statistics from RP's site look bogus ...

Perhaps you meant tainted, as per what RP wrote:

Quote

Results are tainted in several ways: First, the use of any convention affects auctions besides those in which it occurs. Second, a scan of the Flannery camp reveals more top pairs than either of the others, so its IMP percent has a high-octane boost.

The fact that each camp beats its opposition in direct comparison is no surprise. No matter what you play, when hands come up to fit your system, you will show a profit ...

[Zelandakh]

glen, on 2012-August-06, 07:32, said:

The fact that each camp beats its opposition in direct comparison is no surprise. No matter what you play, when hands come up to fit your system, you will show a profit

That is generally untrue for Multi since the majority of players will open a weak 2 in a major (or perhaps 2NT if that hand type is included)) when they have a qualifying hand. A weak 2 in a major is usually more effective than a multi 2♦. This is the reason why I am somewhat surprised that "Multi-2♦ versus not" shows a profit. Any analysis of Multi-2♦ that does not investigate 2M openings is (imho) more than tainted. Equally, RP only lists this caveat for the 2♦ openers and not for the other categories. My previous post explained why the statistics of every category in this list are flawed.

[32519]

Seems like Larry Cohen doesn't recommend Puppet Stayman after a 2NT opening bid (because it makes it hard to handle 5-4 in the majors).

[glen]

32519, on 2012-September-08, 06:55, said:

Seems like Larry Cohen doesn't recommend Puppet Stayman after a 2NT opening bid (because it makes it hard to handle 5-4 in the majors).

You may not know this, but Larry Cohen (Florida) is "persona non grata" at the SBO (Secret Bridge Olympics) due to his constant whining about having to play against exotica

[32519]

Is this hand another failure for Puppet Stayman or just poor bidding by N/S?

---

1. East led the ♣3 to the Queen
2. What's your plan now?

4♠ can't fail. So was this hand poor bidding or just unlucky? Some may frown upon the 2NT bid when holding 5/4 in the majors?

[aguahombre]

We, too, would have opened 2NT with that one. IMO, when the primes are so strong in the majors, opener should choose to respond to Puppet as if he/she has one or two 4-carders rather than just showing the 5-bagger. Pard and I have discussed this.

Then, responder can get us to 4♠.

[lalldonn]

If I had opened 2NT with that hand and had to choose, I would much rather show both majors than five hearts. Missing a 4-4 spade fit looks more damaging than missing a 5-3 heart fit.

[glen]

32519, on 2012-November-10, 11:32, said:

... was this hand poor bidding or just unlucky?

The problem was not using advanced Puppet. Over 3♥, 3♠ is a puppet to 3NT (puppet/puppet), either to play (will pass 3NT) or slam try in ♥s (will cuebid over 3NT), and 3NT directly over 3♥ is choice of games with 4♠s.

[PeterAlan]

campboy, on 2012-March-31, 10:01, said:

For anyone who might be interested, there are 3393199716 balanced 20-21 counts, of which 534618234, so about 15.8%, have a 5-card major.

Coming late to this, but since there seemed still to be some debate about the statistics despite campboy's contribution, he is of course spot on. For those who want the detailed breakdown of the 3,393,199,716 balanced 20-21 counts, there are 783,109,248 4-3-3-3, 1,540,854,000 4-4-3-2 and 1,069,236,468 (= 2 * 534,618,234; half are 5-minor) 5-3-3-2 shape.

From these facts, evidently 15.76% have a 5-card major and 49.38% a 4-card major (7.57% with two 4-card majors and 41.81% exactly one) for a total of 65.14% with at least one 4/5-card major.

[Original post edited to correct errors]

[manudude03]

There is something severely wrong with those stats. There must be at least one 4 card suit and logically at least half the time, that 4+ card suit will be a major, so why is there at least a 4 card major less than half the time?

edit: just looked into the numbers in more detail. Assuming your generic numbers are right, there would be 391,554,624 4-3-3-3s with a 4 card major, 1,412,449,500 4-4-3-2s with at least 1 4 card major and 534,618,234 5-3-3-2s with a 5 card major

That adds to 2,338,622,358 hands, which is around 68.92% of the total you gave for balanced 20-21 counts.

[Free]

32519, on 2012-November-10, 11:32, said:

Is this hand another failure for Puppet Stayman or just poor bidding by N/S?

---

1. East led the ♣3 to the Queen
2. What's your plan now?

4♠ can't fail. So was this hand poor bidding or just unlucky? Some may frown upon the 2NT bid when holding 5/4 in the majors?

I don't see much wrong with opening this hand 1♥ and planning to reverse 2♠. It wouldn't be the first time I opened at 1-level with 20-21HCP, I can vaguely remember a bad experience when it got passed out and we missed game, but otherwise never had any complaints.

Personally I've had very bad experiences with opening NT with 5-4M, so maybe I'm biased. I've opened 2NT twice in my life with 5-4M, and in both cases we had a fit which we didn't find, and in both cases we got a poor result (both were MP scoring). Once I decided to show my 5 card suit and as a result we lost the 4-4 fit OM, the other time I decided to show a 4-4 because the 5 card was poor, and we missed a 5-3 fit. About a year ago I had opps who opened 2NT with 5-4M, bid like they had a 4-4, and after responder signed off in 3NT they just bid 4M in their 5 card suit. Needless to say they landed in their 5-3 fit.

[PeterAlan]

manudude03, on 2012-November-10, 13:40, said:

There is something severely wrong with those stats. There must be at least one 4 card suit and logically at least half the time, that 4+ card suit will be a major, so why is there at least a 4 card major less than half the time?

edit: just looked into the numbers in more detail. Assuming your generic numbers are right, there would be 391,554,624 4-3-3-3s with a 4 card major, 1,412,449,500 4-4-3-2s with at least 1 4 card major and 534,618,234 5-3-3-2s with a 5 card major

That adds to 2,338,622,358 hands, which is around 68.92% of the total you gave for balanced 20-21 counts.

You're quite right: carelessness on my part - I'd included only half of the one 4-card major cases. Thank you for pointing it out. I've now corrected the numbers, but perhaps you should check! The basic totals for the hand shapes were correct - it was my percentages that were wrong.

It's easy to make a slip in a rush (I think you'll find it's 5/6 not 11/12 of the 4-4-3-2s that have at least one 4-card major; then your total becomes 2,210,217,858 hands and our figures agree).