[PhilG007]

How often have you been in the situation where you want to use Stayman but your
pesky RHO beats you to it by overcalling 2C? There is a way around this though it
requires partnership agreement Indirect Stayman. Using this device,a double of
2Clubs takes the place of the robbed bid. One example should suffice:-

East West North East South
♠AQ10x[ 1NT 2♣ ?
♥KJ10x
♦Kxx
♣Jx East has a perfect hand for Stayman but North butts in with 2♣ first. Using Indirect Stayman,
East doubles but it's not for penalties. The double tells West,"They pinched my bid,partner. Do you have
4 card major suit?" If West has a major he bids it in the normal way. If he doesn't,he responds 2♦
the statutory denial. A very useful convention worth committing to memory.

[Lord Molyb]

Sorry, I didn't look at the forum.

[eagles123]

would say that lebensohl and rubensohl 2 well known methods have ways to bid stayman over inteference and that's not even considering more expert methods

why is your system better?

Thanks,


Eagles

[Vampyr]

eagles123, on 2013-April-29, 16:20, said:

why is your system better?

This treatment is more common than you think -- don't most people you know play double here as takeout, albeit often only with competitive hands?

(Also as an aside, Lebensohl is not as effective when the opps bid clubs, since many people don't have a "slow" way to bid Stayman. Some time ago I mentioned that my preferred method was 2NT-3♣-3♦, preferring to give up one of my three ways to show diamonds on order to have a second way to bid Stayman, but this was met with derision.)

[Antrax]

I play X here as Stayman. It's not the most efficient treatment, but it adds no memory strain.

[Zelandakh]

Here are 3 methods after 1NT - (2♣) (=nat) suitable for intermediate and below.

1. System on
1NT - 2♣
==
X = Stayman
2♦ = hearts
2♥ = spades
2♠ = diamonds
2NT = invite
3 bids to taste
--

2. Lebensohl
1NT - (2♣)
==
X = takeout, including GF hands with a 4 card major and no club stop
2♦ = diamonds, weak
2♥ = hearts, weak
2♠ = spades, weak
2NT = puppet to 3♣ with a suit invite or to play 3NT with a club stop
3♣ = stop-showing Stayman, shows one or both 4 card majors with a club stop
3♦ = diamonds, GF
3♥ = hearts, GF
3♠ = spades, GF
3NT = no 4 card major, no club stop
--

3. Rubensohl
==
X = takeout
2♦ = diamonds, weak
2♥ = hearts, weak
2♠ = spades, weak
2NT = stopper-ask Stayman (now 3♣ denies a stopper (then 3♦ asks for majors); 3M shows the major and a stopper)
3♣ = diamonds, invite or better
3♦ = hearts, invite or better
3♥ = spades, invite or better
3♠ = no 4 card major, no club stop
3NT = to play with club stop
--

All of these can be improved but are perfectly playable as is without any further complexity. One thing to bear in mind is that it is extremely common for a 2♣ opening not to be natural. That in turn has a bearing in how Responder's bids should be structured.

[PhilG007]

eagles123, on 2013-April-29, 16:20, said:

would say that lebensohl and rubensohl 2 well known methods have ways to bid stayman over inteference and that's not even considering more expert methods

why is your system better?

Thanks,


Eagles

Agree lebensohl and rubensohl are also good methods,Eagles. But remember this topic was posted on a
section aimed at Novices and Beginners who may find them a tad too high brow.
My suggestion is simple and easy to understand and remember. A no brainer. Lebensohl and Rubensohl are best left
until passed the elementary stages.

[PhilG007]

Zelandakh, on 2013-April-30, 03:00, said:

Here are 3 methods after 1NT - (2♣) (=nat) suitable for intermediate and below.

1. System on
1NT - 2♣
==
X = Stayman
2♦ = hearts
2♥ = spades
2♠ = diamonds
2NT = invite
3 bids to taste
--

2. Lebensohl
1NT - (2♣)
==
X = takeout, including GF hands with a 4 card major and no club stop
2♦ = diamonds, weak
2♥ = hearts, weak
2♠ = spades, weak
2NT = puppet to 3♣ with a suit invite or to play 3NT with a club stop
3♣ = stop-showing Stayman, shows one or both 4 card majors with a club stop
3♦ = diamonds, GF
3♥ = hearts, GF
3♠ = spades, GF
3NT = no 4 card major, no club stop
--

3. Rubensohl
==
X = takeout
2♦ = diamonds, weak
2♥ = hearts, weak
2♠ = spades, weak
2NT = stopper-ask Stayman (now 3♣ denies a stopper (then 3♦ asks for majors); 3M shows the major and a stopper)
3♣ = diamonds, invite or better
3♦ = hearts, invite or better
3♥ = spades, invite or better
3♠ = no 4 card major, no club stop
3NT = to play with club stop
--

All of these can be improved but are perfectly playable as is without any further complexity. One thing to bear in mind is that it is extremely common for a 2♣ opening not to be natural. That in turn has a bearing in how Responder's bids should be structured.

[PhilG007]

Too much baggage for a Novice/Beginner to commit to memory Zelandakh
At that stage,it's all about simplicity.

[TylerE]

Around here (NC), among decent players, it is fairly common to play systems on over X/2♣, X of 2♣ as Stayman, and Lebensohl from 2♥ on up, as well as Lebensohl-style penalty/value doubles of bids that aren't 2♣.

I do not believe basic lebensohl is an excessive memory burden, even for a beginner - the bids are overwhelmingly natural, or "obviously" non-natural (e.g. cuebids).

[mycroft]

Lebensohl (or a variant) is, as I've said several times, "the most complicated convention I think everyone should play". It's just way too easy to be stolen from (by people like me, who think the D is the most important letter in DONT, and at least at Matchpoints will overcall on three chords and the truth) otherwise. I especially warn them away from "stolen bid doubles" - because then they *will* rob you blind (the second time). Overcall on 9xxxx and a 4-count? Well, they can't double me (or play a "cards double", or whatever meaning), so why not?

Having said that, I will teach "half-lebensohl" to many people as a "first step".

• two bids are to play
  
• three bids are forcing
  
• cuebid (of a suit *shown*) is Stayman
  
• double is penalty

Let 'em flop around into 3NT with someone with a stopper; give up the competitive 3-of-a-lower. FOR NOW. Show them the cute 2NT trick later.

Having said *that*, I'm happy to play systems on over 2♣ (double is Stayman), or not - and I like Vampyr's 3♦ is Stayman-with-a-stopper trick myself when "not", too. As long as I know.

A small story - I play (in at least one partnership) "transfer overcalls of NT in direct seat". I have had 1NT-(2♦! - hearts)-X! "transfer to hearts" before.

[1eyedjack]

With due deference to the subforum, I would just observe that few players use a 2C overcall over 1N as a natural bid. It certainly adds simplicity to disregard its meaning when you assign a definition to double but there may come a time when you will want to take this into account.

[Vampyr]

1eyedjack, on 2013-May-01, 16:26, said:

With due deference to the subforum, I would just observe that few players use a 2C overcall over 1N as a natural bid. It certainly adds simplicity to disregard its meaning when you assign a definition to double but there may come a time when you will want to take this into account.

It's unusual for folks to play 2 ♣ as natural but some do. Obviously if the bid is an undisclosed single-suited aor is artificial with an anchor suit, your methods will vary.

But don't forget that the treatment in the OP was intended for beginners, and it is a place to start.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

what do you do, if your partner opens 1D, and get an 2c overcall, and you want to find out,
if partner has a 4 card major, that fits with your 4 card major, you cannot show anymore?

The answer: You make a neg. X, or you make T/O X - whatever you call it.

Similar if they overcall your NT opening, play X as T/O, and partner will know, that you are
most likely interested in a 4 card major.

This works fairly reasonable, even if 2C is artifical.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[gwnn]

System on is fine against every meaning of 2♣ except both majors (maybe even Astro).

[campboy]

PhilG007, on 2013-April-30, 04:29, said:

Too much baggage for a Novice/Beginner to commit to memory Zelandakh
At that stage,it's all about simplicity.

Treating a 2♣ overcall differently from other overcalls is not simple IMO.

[shnk]

I have a new beginner partner that I don't want to introduce to lebensohl quite yet. I don't like it but we are using the stolen bid trick for all 2-level overcalls. Is there a better way without the complexity of lebensohl?

[Zelandakh]

shnk, on 2013-May-31, 02:08, said:

I have a new beginner partner that I don't want to introduce to lebensohl quite yet. I don't like it but we are using the stolen bid trick for all 2-level overcalls. Is there a better way without the complexity of lebensohl?

2 level bids natural and competitive; 3 level bids natural and GF; double takeout. Just add 2NT when they can handle it. If your partner is good with the transfer concept then Rubensohl without the Stayman "transfer" is also reasonable. Just use a takeout double with the Stayman hand.