[jillybean]

Hello We've been enjoying playing 12-14nt for a while now, I like to think it gives us an edge on our competition.
We play 2♣ non forcing stayman, 2♦ forcing stayman, 2♥/2♠ to play and 2N as a relay to 3♣, pass or correct.

We have not used the 1N:2N sequence however, there were 2 hands from the club tonight where if I was going to use it, I should have.
Partner opened 1nt and I held #1 T8,942,AQT432,J7 , #2 943,84,KT9765,J9 (edited)

I decided 1nt was the better spot for both these hands and passed, good results on both boards. (I don't know exactly how they scored, the full results won't be posted until tomorrow) These boards were both tied for top, (7/8) 63% game against a good field.

So I'm not using 2N as a weak take out for the minors, should I, do others have a different treatment?

[Mbodell]

I agree that it is rarely right to play in 3m if you can play 1nt instead. A hand with a long minor and no strength like xxx Jxx x Jxxxxx might be one example.

As for 2nt, there is always natural invitational (a good 11 count).

[silvr bull]

After partner opens 12-14 1NT and RHO passes, my style uses 2NT as an invitational raise with something like a good 11 to a bad 12 HCP. With two way Stayman, I have no need to use 2NT as a relay when RHO passes. My jump to 3m is weak to play, but 2C followed by 3m is invitational.

After RHO passed, I would jump to 3m with both of your example hands to gain a little preemptive value, and to make it less likely that I might need to defend against 3M. If RHO overcalled 2M, I would bid 3D (not forcing, but shows forward going values) with your first example, or Lebensohl to 3C with your second.

[1eyedjack]

One popular scheme is to use 2S as a transfer to Clubs and 2N as a transfer to Diamonds. Obviously not possible in your current setup because you are not transferring into the majors so 2S is not freed up. But one of the supposed benefits is to enable opener to show or deny encouragement without committing beyond 3m. This can help you to find a thin 3N when the suit is running.

My point being that where your minor suit run-outs do not provide the possibility of that distinction there is a CASE for limiting the hand types for (in this case) 2N response to be those with some interest in 3N opposite a well fitting hand. Without such interest you just pass, and then run if doubled in 1N. Over 2N, opener bypasses Clubs if wanting to try 3N opposite a Club suit. Or bypasses both minors if encouraged regardless. This also helps you to judge how to deal with a competitive auction when the oppo are at 3M.

Of some possible significance to the decision is what do you currently play an immediate 3m response to 1N to show?

Type of scoring may be relevant to the decision. Losing the run-out is I think less of a problem at MP scoring. If you play in a mixture of MP and IMP events and want to play just one system in both, then I think that argues for retaining the run-out.

Ultimately, your 1N response structure tends to hang together as a whole, and does not lend itself to tinkering with individual bids without having some knock-on consequences.

[karlson]

It would be helpful to know what the other two cards of the second hand were, but I would try to play in 3♦ on the first hand, and probably on the second hand too.

I definitely don't think it's a waste of system to have a way to play 3 of a minor, in fact, I'd even consider it mandatory.

[johnu]

Are we allowed to assume we have opponents with a heartbeat, or are we playing against empty chairs?

[helene_t]

What would a 3m response show? Maybe you need them for something else, but if not then 3m has more preemptive effect than 2NT, and also the natural invitational 2NT has several advantages over nonpromisory stayman.

Anyway, I really think you need a way to sign off in 3m. Not just to improve the partscore but also to prevent opps from finding their major suit fit.

[Gerben42]

jillybean, on 2015-July-07, 23:54, said:

Hello We've been enjoying playing 12-14nt for a while now, I like to think it gives us an edge on our competition.

Hi Kathryn, I think so too!

Quote

We play 2♣ non forcing stayman, 2♦ forcing stayman, 2♥/2♠ to play and 2N as a relay to 3♣, pass or correct.

We have not used the 1N:2N sequence however, there were 2 hands from the club tonight where if I was going to use it, I should have.
Partner opened 1nt and I held #1 T8,942,AQT432,J7 , #2 943,84,KT9765

I decided 1nt was the better spot for both these hands and passed, good results on both boards. (I don't know exactly how they scored, the full results won't be posted until tomorrow)
So I'm not using 2N as a weak take out for the minors, should I, do others have a different treatment?

In our league team, we also play two-way Stayman. Perhaps you are interested in our full scheme:

2♣: NF Stayman, including weak hands with both majors, a three-suiter without clubs, with one minor, and weak hands with 4♠ + a minor
--> after the response of 2♦♥, 2♠ shows 4♠ + 5+minor weak, after any response, 3m is to play, 3M is invitational with a 5-card suit.
2♦: Forcing Stayman (as a passed hand, it asks for a doubleton major - when responder has a maximum pass with 5-card M, he can play in 5-2 fit at the 2-level or invite; opener bids his doubleton major or 2NT with at least 3-3)
2M: To play
2NT: Natural invite
3-level bid: Natural invite, 6-card suit

Pretty easy, and works well! Natural bidding has become so out of vogue but sometimes... it's the best.

About when to stick in 1NT and when not: In my experience when you feel opponents are going to bid or double over 1NT in 4th seat anyway, it is better to start running proactively.

Your #2 hand has one suit missing, but not vuln with 3 HCP I would go for it. The reason is that when partner has no good support, 1NT will be a disaster anyway as your suit is out of reach. With a good possibility to bring in the suit in 1NT opposite two small or honor-small (e.g. AQTxxx) I would try 1NT.

Just contact me if you need more weak NT tips

p.s. we play Meckwell runouts (XX = both M or one minor)

[Zelandakh]

One very good option is to move the weak diamond hands into 2♣, which sometime makes it more appealing to take out. There are many possible schemes along this line, a very simple one being, in effect, a switch between the weak and invitational diamond hands:-

2♣ = Stayman
... - 2♦ = <4 hearts, <4 spades
... - ... - 2M = 5+ suit, INV
... - ... - 3♣ = nat, INV
... - 2♥ = 4+ hearts
... - ... - 2♠ = 5+ spades, INV
... - ... - 2NT = 4 spades, INV
... - ... - 3♣ = nat, INV
... - ... - 3♦ = to play
... - 2♠ = 4+ spades
... - ... - 2NT = nat, INV
... - ... - 3♣ = nat, INV
... - ... - 3♦ = to play
... - ... - 3♥ = 5+ hearts, INV
... - ... - 3♠ = 4+ spades, INV
2♦ = art GF
... - 2♥ = 4 hearts
... - 2♠ = 4 spades, <4 hearts
... - 2NT = <4 hearts, <4 spades, <5 clubs, <5 diamonds
... - 3♣ = 5 clubs
... - 3♦ = 2353
... - 3♥ = 3253
... - 3♠ = 3352, min
... - 3NT = 3352, max
2M = to play
2NT = nat, INV
3♣ = to play
3♦ = nat, INV
3M = 6+ suit, GF

It should be obvious that this is not an optimal scheme and there are many refinements you can make. Unlike Gerben, I happen to think that natural bidding is not the best over a weak NT and that you can achieve more with transfers than double-barreled Stayman. On the other hand, Mike does like DBS so you might find it best to send him a private message and see if he will part with a copy of his preferred methods which are considerably better than the above.

[WesleyC]

You didn't mention the form of scoring in your post. Assuming match-points then passing 1NT on those kind of hands will often be you best chance for a good board, even if it doesn't get you to the technically best contract.

Even opposite a weak NT, I think there is a lot of value in playing 4-suit transfers. The main advantages come when you have constructive hands, specifically being able to show a 5M and a second suit or being able to transfer to a minor and show a shortage.

I personally play 2C as 'garbage' stayman (with new suits at the 3-level as G/F and 1NT 2C 2M 3oM as G/F with support) and i don't really see the shortcomings. Can someone point out the benefits of 2-way stayman?

[silvr bull]

WesleyC, on 2015-July-08, 07:17, said:

Can someone point out the benefits of 2-way stayman?

Two way Stayman makes slam sequences easier. How would you bid a hand like Axx KQx Kxxxxx x after partner opens 12-14 NT? With 2D forcing to game, it is easy to bid 2D then 3D as a mild slam try, without going past the safety of 3NT if opener shows no interest in a D slam.

[Zelandakh]

silvr bull, on 2015-July-08, 08:24, said:

How would you bid a hand like Axx KQx Kxxxxx x after partner opens 12-14 NT?

Well traditionally one responded 3♦ to show 6+ diamonds and slam interest - complicated for sure. Playing transfers many would be able to show diamonds and a singleton club below 3NT. Both of these seem considerably better than using 2♦ followed by 3♦ to show 5+ diamonds. Of course you can play relay responses after 2♦ GF Stayman. That potentially allows for a completely different style of slam auction.

[mikeh]

Hi Kathryn

While I appreciate that you got good results in 1N on the 2 hands in question, in the long run, and especially against opps with experience playing against weak notrumps, you are going to be much better off jamming the auction to the 3-level than allowing 4th chair to balance or, indeed, often better off than playing in a hopeless 1N when they pass it out.

I have played just about every range of notrump known to man-kind, with a lot of 10-12, 11-13, 11-14, 12-14.

Here is the scheme I think works the best of the various ones I have tried/seen:

2♣: non-forcing stayman, includes most invitational hands, including a lot of hands with a long major, and could also be very weak (garbage stayman)

2♦: artificial game force. I prefer transfer-based responses, which I have described several times here and which make the method far better (imo) than simple gf stayman

2M: to play. 0-bad 11. Opener is allowed to raise with a 4432 14 count and 4 cards support, protected to some degree by the LOTT, and allowing for game when responder is a max

2N: either both minors or a diamond signoff. If both minors, then either weak or strong. Opener bids his better minor. Over 3♣, 3♦ is to play. 3M by responder is always shortness, both minors, forcing

3♣: to play

3♦ invitational. Typically 6+ diamonds with 2/3 top honours and invitational to 3N.

3M: invitational but only to 4M: opener cannot bid 3N to play. So typically a lot of shape. A reasonable alternative, esp at mps, is 'to play'. A 3 level 'to play' call need not be 'weak' as such...just no interest in game, so 0-9+ or so.

4♦/♥ transfers.


I would have got to 3m on the 2 hands you mentioned. I would be (mildly) interested in knowing whether the reason 1N scored well for you was that the hands belonged to the opps in 2M and how 3m would have fared. My suspicion is that on at least one of the hands, and maybe both, 3m would have been a reasonable score, if not as good as 1N. Playing 1N on these hands, especially if vulnerable, is high-risk/high-gain bridge...not so much when nv.

[jillybean]

Thanks for the replies, here are the two deals in full

---

---

Perhaps now is the right time to look at transfer responses.

[Jinksy]

I don't think I've ever heard two experienced weak NT players play the same system

I won't lay out my full system, but my general experience has been a) that gamehunting dwarves the importance of slamhunting which is extremely rare by comparison b) that the most common tricky games to bid are those which require a major fit to make game worth bidding/inviting, and c) that as a consequence, I want to put my weak takeouts through Stayman, since it gives me a chance to learn about partner's hand before having to decide if I am actually weak. Some example responding hands:

ATxx
x
KQJxx
xxx

At IMPs and probably at MPs I badly want to know if we have a spade fit. If P responds 2♦, I'll usually pass or occasionally bid 2N, depending on scoring, vul etc. If he bids 2♥ I'll bid 3♦ as a sign off. If he bids 2♠ I'll either bid 3♠ or punt game, again depending on scoring and vul etc.

xx
Qxx
Jxxxxx
xx

I'll bid Stayman and either pass 2♦ or bid 3♦ over 2M - if the opps don't come in. The downside is obviously that it preempts them less than using a higher bid immediately would (though 2♠ as an xfer might let them X for the suit), but this is mainly relevant after a first seat 1N - otherwise the opps have both already passed so are less likely to compete aggressively or find a game.*

We've found the gains from constructive bidding heavily outweigh the losses from letting the opps in. Also, to reduce the latter, I like to play any 4-level suited response to 1N as to play - moderately preemptive if 4M, purely preemptive if 4m again because of the low frequency of hands that could use the bids (or their negative inferences) for slamhunting. I prob would only do it on the second hand favourable (and after a 1st seat 1N), but make the hand a bit purer and I think it's valuable:

x
Jxxx
QJTxxx
xx

Looks like 4♦ 3rd in at most vuls.

We also find Stayman invaluable for gamehunting with 5-5 in the majors (where often you'll just punt if P shows one otherwise inviting with some artificial bid to show the shape, or more rarely sign off if he doesn't show one and invite if he does) and signing off with with 44nnsm 4351s etc, so I wouldn't want to trade it for anything NF or with either more or less restrictive responses. We played Keri for a while, which has a lot of nice properties, but in the end missed all the benefits of regular Stayman too much and crawled back to it apologetically.

[kuhchung]

i play the same system in my weak NT as i do in my strong NT. i'm real sophistimuhcated

[akwoo]

kuhchung, on 2015-July-08, 16:13, said:

i play the same system in my weak NT as i do in my strong NT. i'm real sophistimuhcated

I'm also real sophistimuhcated. I play the same system in my strong NT as I do in my weak NT.

[perko90]

You definitely want the ability to play 3m opposite a weak NT. The 2nd hand in particular REALLY wants to get to 3♦. Anything less than Axx for opener in D's, and 1NT becomes a huge uphill struggle with the D's likely dying in the vine. You also don't want to let the opps get in a comfortable balancing bid either.

As for system, when I played weak NT w/o transfers, we played 1NT-3m to play. We played 1NT-2NT as a long suit invite with "crash landing" responses (as Danny Kleinman dubbed them). The opener rebids the cheapest minor they could NOT accept an invite in - or 3NT if accepting all invites. So, for ex., 1NT-2NT; 3D = "if your long suit is clubs, please bid 3NT; if it's diamonds, please pass."

It's optional, but we included 6-card invites in the major, too, because it fits well and otherwise those hands can sometimes get lost in sequences that start w/ Stayman (especially w/ interference). Same rebids by opener either way. It put the 2NT response to good use and off-loaded some pressure from Stayman. We also used Murray 2♦ instead of the more popular GF Stayman, which meant a 2♣ Stayman bid always had some values, so you could really punish the opps that got out of line!

A Stayman sequence and then a 3m rebid was used for the 5m & 4cM hands, where ptr doesn't hit your 4cM.