[wyman]

1n (2c) x (p)
p (2d) ?

2C = single suit
X = Stayman

3C forcing? If not, is 3d clubs or asking? I cant possibly have to bypass 3n to make a forcing raise in clubs right?

[kenberg]

As Helene points out, I lost my mind here. Well, I misread the auction anyway. So just ignore this.

I can't recall ever having this auction but it seems to me that 3♣ should be forcing, and I would take it as such if undiscussed. And I think 3♦ should be natural, also forcing, showing diamonds as well as clubs.I suppose double could show diamonds, I'm just not sure partner would take it that way.

[helene_t]

Ken I think you misread the auction. Opps' suit is diamonds so 3♦ must be some artificial bid. Presumably partner's pass shows clubs but I don't think 3♦ necesarily shows clubs. I would bid 3♦ with [4432] without a diamond stopper, looking for a 4-3 fit in a major if partner doesn't stop diamonds.

[PhilKing]

The answer comes down to whether doubling 2♣ sets up a force at the two level. If the answer is "yes", then you can pass with all mundane hands that are looking for NTs or prepared to play 2♦ doubled, and cue 3♦ with a club fit.

[kenberg]

Helene is right that I misread.I was treating 2♦ as a response to Stayman. My error.
So what now?

My notion of what happens after 1NT-(2♣ single suit)-X Stayman-(P) is that partner bids a four card major if he has one. Either I, the doubler, have at least invitational values and at least one four card major (the usual situation) or perhaps I have both majors and enough shape to tolerate playing at the two level. So, as I see it, partner does not have a four card major. He should have decent clubs for his pass, else he could have bid 2♦. So I think he has clubs and does not have a major. It appears we defend, we play in NT at some level, or we play in clubs at some level. Assuming, as seems reasonable to me, that 2NT, 3NT, and X are all natural calls, I guess 3♦ is a game force of uncertain destination and 3♣ establishes a club fit but, imo, is not forcing.

This opinion, like all of my opinions, subject to revision.

How to show clubs as a forcing raise, the OP asks. I see the problem, I don't really have a solution. I guess if I bid 3♦ and partner bids 3NT I have to let him play there or make a slam try with 4♣.

Added: I suppose that 2NT could be used artificially here, since it's ot all that likely an eight trick contract is right here, but I am not a scientist in these matters. And certainly it's not the expected meaning w/o discussion.

[ggwhiz]

I think 2nt should be lebensohl to 3♣ and the direct 3♣ forcing reverting to an auction of 1nt - 2♦ as a natural overcall.

I had this discussion with partner in 1986 and it hasn't occurred at the table yet.

[kenberg]

ggwhiz, on 2013-September-26, 09:04, said:

I think 2nt should be lebensohl to 3♣ and the direct 3♣ forcing reverting to an auction of 1nt - 2♦ as a natural overcall.

I had this discussion with partner in 1986 and it hasn't occurred at the table yet.

I like this answer. The suggestion makes sense, and the lack of frequency matches my expectation.

[aguahombre]

Of course, the 2NT Lebensohl approach has to be looked at in the context of the Staymanish double by that same player...presumably eliminating all the non-invitational possibilities.

So if 2NT is used, it would be invitational with a club fit, and might be passed, converted to 3C as a decline, or advanced to game.

[Zelandakh]

aguahombre, on 2013-September-26, 15:09, said:

Of course, the 2NT Lebensohl approach has to be looked at in the context of the Staymanish double by that same player...presumably eliminating all the non-invitational possibilities.

Yes and no. Designing the system here around the initial Stayman certainly makes sense but I am not so sure Responder muct have invitational values. How about a 4405/(54)04 hand that was going to use a Crawling Stayman 2♥ rebid after a 2♦ response?

Rubensohl seems to work nicely though and within the context of a Stayman hand actually gives more options than are required. So X = takeout; 2M = weak, nat; 2NT = clubs, weak or GF; 3♦ = 5♥+4♠; 3♥ = 5♠+4♥; 3♠ = stopper ask. That leaves 3♣ without any obvious meaning, since the normal meaning (Stayman) is no longer required. I guess a sensible meaning for this would be an invitational club raise within context; unless anyone has a better suggestion...?