[ewj]

Hi
If not playing Keri, how do people show the various hand types over a weak (or even strong if can apply to both), NT?

[hrothgar]

Books have been written on this subject

Personally, I prefer the Scanian structure as documented in "Notrump Bidding the Scanian Way"

[ewj]

Anyone else care to give their system

[han]

If you google "1NT structure" then you get 21 hits, starting with the ETM system. Surely there is something useful to be found.

Posting my entire 1NT system would be a waste of time imo.

[Cascade]

We play weak (11-14) in first and second seat and strong (15-17) in third and fourth seat. We use the same structure in both cases.

We frequently open 1NT with off-shape hands - 5-card major, six-card minor, 5-4-2-2 but not both majors, 4-4-4-1 and even 5-4-3-1 are possible. Most of the time we are limited by regulation to not regularly open 1NT with a singleton. We have no method to subsequently show the singleton.

This is our structure:

Stayman

2♣ Stayman but doesn't promise a four-card major. It is the only way to invite without a five-card major. Our 1NT can also include a five-card major so we might Stayman with only a three-card major. We then have a follow up to find the five-card major. We use normal responses of 2♦ no major; 2♥/♠ show four or five in the major - with four-four we bid 2♥.

Over 2♦ Response:
==============

2♥/♠ are to play normally 5-4 in the majors but 4-4 is possible for 2♥.

2NT is standard invite

3♣ is slammish and asks for controls. We may or may not have a fit

3♦ asks for a three-card major. We Stayman with 5-3 or 3-5 in the majors in case opener has a five-card major.

3♥/♠ show 5-4 in the majors (not Smolen)

3NT to play

4♥/♠ show 6-4 must be at least mildly slammish or we wouldn't bother looking for the 4-4 fit.

4NT Quantitative

Over 2♥/♠ Response:
==================

2♠ is forcing invitational or better with four spades

2NT invite

3♣ asks for controls may or maynot have a fit

3♦ asks for a five-card major or three-cards in the other major

3♥/♠ raise is invitational

3♥/♠ new suit is a cue-bid - maybe a precursor to RKCB (we use kickback)

3NT to play does not promise four in the other major. We must bid 2♠ over 2♥ with that hand

4♣/♦ cues

4♥/♠ raise to play

4NT Quantitative

Jacoby Transfers

Standard

New suit is forcing to game. Except 2♠ after 2♦ Jacoby.

Jump new suit is a self-splinter

NTs offer a choice of contract including 4NT.

5NT offers a choice at the six-level or invites seven. With a maximum opener bids 6♣/♦ as a cue-bid.

2♠ over 1NT

This shows both minors 5-4 or better. It denies a four-card major.

Opener bids 2NT with no preference 3-3 or 4-4 Otherwise bids the longer minor.

3♥/♠ rebid by responder shows a singleton

3NT is 5-4-2-2 with mild slam interest

4NT is 2-2-5-4 Quantitative direct 4NT is 2-2-4-5 (since with a three-card major we would look for a 5-3 major suit fit)

2NT over 1NT

This is a single-suited minor hand either weak or slammish.

Opener bids 3♣.

Responder passes or corrects to 3♦ with a weak hand.

3♥/♠ show a singleton and are ambiguous about the minor.

3NT denies a singleton and is a mild slam try ambiguous about the minor.

4♣/♦ are serious slam trys denying a singleton and showing the minor bid.

Three Level Responses

These show four (or more in a minor) cards in the suit bid and a singleton in the other suit of the same rank.

3minor can be one, two-suited (4-card major) or three suited. 3Major is always two or three-suited (can have a longer minor).

We scramble for a fit or bid 3NT with wasted values in the short suit.

A 'cue-bid' of the short suit by either player shows a great hand in support of partner's last bid suit.

4♣ Gerber

My favourite convention - need I say more.

It has been useful once in the last five years.

Texas Transfers

Either no slam interest, frequently marginal game values or even semi-preemptive, or about to use an asking bid.

4♠/4NT are kickback Roman Key-Card Blackwood

4NT over 4♥ and any new suit at the five-level are exclusion RKCB.

4NT Quantitative

This should be specifically 2-2-4-5.

[luke warm]

here's mine, played with 10-13 or 12-15 nt... open 1nt with any balanced hand, including 5332 with a major but not 6m322... 2c is invitational puppet/garbage, 2d is game forcing stayman

1nt : 2M = to play
1nt : 2nt = relay to 3c, preemptive pass or correct
1nt : 3c/d/h/s = invitational with 6+
1nt : 3nt = invitational strength (9-12), 2245, 4m by opener is signoff
1nt : 4c = 5 clubs and 4 hearts, 9-12 (usually 2425)
1nt : 4d = 5 diamonds and 4 hearts, 9-12 (usually 2452)
1nt : 4h/4s/5c/5d = to play, but usually no slam ambition else go thru 2d

1nt : 2c = invitational puppet or garbage.. opener bids a 5M else 2d.. after opener's 2d -

pass = garbage, would have passed anything

2h = denies 4 hearts, may have 4 spades... used to invite in nt.. if opener has 4 spades and a hand that would not accept an invite, he bids 2s.. if he would accept, 3s... if he would not accept w/out 4 spades, 2nt... if he would accept w/out 4 spades, 3nt.. 1nt : 2c : 2h : 2s : 2nt shows the flattish invite w/out 4 spades

2s = guarantees 4 hearts, denies 4 spades... opener bids game in hearts or nt if would accept invite, signs off in either if not

2nt = 4/4 in majors, invitational

3c = invitational 5/4 in majors (5 spades)

3d = invitational 4/5 in majors (5 hearts)

3h = invitational 13(45)... 4m by opener is signoff

3s = invitational 31(45)... 4m by opener is signoff

3nt = 2254, 4m by opener is signoff,

4c = 9-12, 5 clubs and 4+ spades

4d = 9-12, 5 diamonds and 4+ spades

1nt : 2d = game forcing stayman

opener bids 4 card suits up the line... responder relays for info... finds dist first, min/max (if room permits), controls, and then spiral scan... any 3nt by responder is to play, any jump to slam or game is to play... all 'next suit' bids by responder are relays of one kind or another

[awm]

I must confess, Luke's structure is quite beyond me. Why are you leaping to 4♣ on 2425 hands with 9-12 points? It seems like these are hands with no guaranteed fit, where you are too strong too really want to preempt, but too weak to have a clear game force opposite your weak notrump range. Seems like you will go minus a lot for no real reason (and a bad score).

These days I play Keri-Garrod with most of my regular partners. Our variant is close to the original Keri (from Ron Klinger's book) with various improvements; I'm not a big fan of "revised Keri" personally.

Before playing Keri, I used LIPS. This worked pretty well. The main reason we switched was that we liked getting out at 2-major on the invitational hands; however LIPS has a number of advantages as well, including a direct "signoff" 2M bid and ways to sign off with both majors (2♦) AND to sign off in 2♦ (puppet 2♣ gets you there almost all the time). My general feeling is that LIPS is better for getting out with garbage hands and for some minor-suit slam hands, Keri is better at stopping low on the invites and getting to the right game on game-forcing but non-slammish hands.

I play some more traditional methods with a few partners, but all those cases are strong notrumps. For example, Elianna and I play stayman, transfers to majors, 2♠ minor suit stayman, and 2NT weak with clubs or any strong 4441. These methods are perhaps easier to learn and remember than Keri, and also do a better job of right-siding major suit contracts (more important opposite a strong notrump than a weak). Slam bidding is okay, although I think some of the more complex methods (LIPS/Keri) are slightly better.

[keylime]

Over 10-12 Nt:

2C = NF stayman, start of any invite or weak signoff
2D = GF Stayman
2H/S = to play
2NT = invites 3NT
3C/D = to play
3H/S = inv.
3NT = to play

Over 1NT-2D, followups are artificial for both sides.

Over 14+ to 17- NT:

2C = stayman
2D = xfer to hearts, where 2S cancels transfer and demands puppet to 2NT
2H = xfer to spades
2S = clubs
2NT = diamonds
3C/D = weak and strong 5-5 minors
3H/S = stiff showing, any 5-4 minors, slammish
3NT = to play
4C/D = South African Texas
4H/S = to play
4NT = both minors, 6-6/6-5

NO Gerber. Many artificial followups in our transfers.

If really wanted, ask for the full thing (it's an email not a forum thing).

[pclayton]

awm, on Apr 23 2005, 08:37 PM, said:

I must confess, Luke's structure is quite beyond me. Why are you leaping to 4♣ on 2425 hands with 9-12 points? It seems like these are hands with no guaranteed fit, where you are too strong too really want to preempt, but too weak to have a clear game force opposite your weak notrump range. Seems like you will go minus a lot for no real reason (and a bad score).

These days I play Keri-Garrod with most of my regular partners. Our variant is close to the original Keri (from Ron Klinger's book) with various improvements; I'm not a big fan of "revised Keri" personally.

Before playing Keri, I used LIPS. This worked pretty well. The main reason we switched was that we liked getting out at 2-major on the invitational hands; however LIPS has a number of advantages as well, including a direct "signoff" 2M bid and ways to sign off with both majors (2♦) AND to sign off in 2♦ (puppet 2♣ gets you there almost all the time). My general feeling is that LIPS is better for getting out with garbage hands and for some minor-suit slam hands, Keri is better at stopping low on the invites and getting to the right game on game-forcing but non-slammish hands.

I play some more traditional methods with a few partners, but all those cases are strong notrumps. For example, Elianna and I play stayman, transfers to majors, 2♠ minor suit stayman, and 2NT weak with clubs or any strong 4441. These methods are perhaps easier to learn and remember than Keri, and also do a better job of right-siding major suit contracts (more important opposite a strong notrump than a weak). Slam bidding is okay, although I think some of the more complex methods (LIPS/Keri) are slightly better.

Adam - what are the modifications that Garrod made to Keri?

[Gerben42]

Start standardish:
2♣ Stayman with distribution relays.
2♦ Transfer to ♥
2♥ Transfer to ♠

But then:
2♠ Transfer to 2NT!
* 2NT = Minimum
* 3♣ = Maximum

Then after 2NT/3♣:
Pass/3NT: I had natural invitation
3♣/Pass: I wanted to play 3♣
3♦: Want to play that
3M: Singleton in other major, 5-4 minors, strong

2NT: Both minors weak or strong
3minor: Natural invitation
3♥/♠: Preempt (might be useful for something else though)
3NT: To play
4♣: Pick a major
4red: Transfer
4♠: Pick a minor (unlike 2NT this hand knows where its going)
4NT: Quantitative

[awm]

Keri-Garrod modifications are as follows:

Basic Keri response structure is intact (as per Klinger's original text), except that splinters now show shortage in the other suit of the same rank. 3♥/3♠ always guarantee four cards in the bid major (0-1 in the other major). 3♣/♦ guarantee 3-4 in each major, could be 3361 for example.

After 1NT-2♣-2♦-2M (invitational, NF) opener's rebids are:

Pass = min 3-4 cards
2♠ = 4+♠, if min will be doubleton ♥, forcing one round
2NT = min doubleton in partner's suit
3♣ = max doubleton in partner's suit
3♦ = max three cards in partner's suit
3M = good minimum four card support
3N = maximum, 4333 with four card support

3-minor here is not forcing despite showing a max. Responder can check back over 3♦ by bidding 3 of the other major to ask "are you 4333" to get to 3NT when right.

After 1NT-transfer:

2NT = two suited GF, second suit is CLUBS
3♣ = 5-major and four diamonds, GF
3♦ = 4-5 major and 5-6 diamonds, 10+ cards total, GF

After the 3♣ bid, 3♦ relays for shortage (hi/low/2-2 not slammish, 2-2 slammish).
After the 3♦ bid, 3♥ asks about the major (3♠ = 5 cards slammish, 3NT = 4 cards NF, 4m = 4 cards slam interest, 4M = 5 cards no slam interest)
After the 3♦ bid, 3♠ sets partner's major (4 card fit)
After the 2NT bid, 3♣ relays. Now 3♦ shows 4-5 major and 5-6 clubs, else shortage (symmetric with the above).

Note that we can transfer with four cards in the bid major and 6 cards in a minor with a good hand.

After 1NT-2♣-2♦ or 1NT-2NT-3♣:

3♥ = 0-1 spade, normally three hearts (with four would bid 3♥ direct) 5+ cards minor
3♠ = 0-1 heart, normally three spades, 5+ cards in minor transferred to

-- Adam

[Free]

Here's what I play over mini NT (10-12, no 5 card M):

2♣ = relay, either garbage stayman, invitational hand with a 4 card M, any GF/slam try hand
2♦ = to play
2M = to play
2NT = invitational without a 4 card M
3♣ = to play
3♦ = good ♦ suit, invites 3NT
3M = invitational
3NT = to play

Over 2♣ we have a full relay structure in case we're interested in slam.

[Chamaco]

The following 2 structures are described by Rosenkrantz/Truscott in Bidding on target.
I skip the full shape-showing relay here.

Structure 1
- 2way stayman;
.........2C can be (very) weak, scrambling, or invitational;
.........2D is a start of Truscott's relay structure;
- 2M = to play
- 2Nt invite
- 3-level bids undefined; can be splinters, or invitational 2 suiters emphasizing the minors

Structure 2
Allows for transfers. Xfers are used for
.....- weak hands (xfer and pass)
.....- gf hands not slammish (xfer and 3NT pass/correct)
.....- 2 suiters invitational only: xfer and new suit.

- 2C is "New Zealand" Stayman, weak/strong, opener respodns at first just like a plain stayman (bids first 4cM up the line, 2D if none)
.....- if opener denies a major with 2D, 2H is relay for distribution, whereas 2NT is natural invitational
......- if opener shows a major
.............- 2NT is natural invitational in misfit with the major, whereas
.............- 1st step except 2NT (2S or 3C) asks shape
- 2D/H and higher and xfers (full transfers, any way you like to play them)
- 3-level bids undefined; can be splinters, or invitational 2 suiters emphasizing the minors

[luke warm]

awm, on Apr 23 2005, 10:37 PM, said:

Why are you leaping to 4♣ on 2425 hands with 9-12 points?

yes, this is one of those bids that was created back when i was trying to show all shapes... i just left it in because the bid seemed useless anyway, and all game forces went thru 2d... i might take it (and a few more) out

here's another i've played, attributed to garozzo

• 1NT
  • 2C Relay to 2D for a sign off or game invitation
    
  • 2D Game forcing relay
    
  • 2M Game invitational relay with a five card or longer major
    
  • 2NT Asks opener to choose his longest/best minor
    
  • 3C To play
    
  • 3D To play
    
  • 3M To play, bordering on preemptive
    
  • 3NT To play
    
  • 4C Gerber
    
  • 4Red Texas Transfer with game interest only
    
  • 4S Wildly distributional minor suited hand
    
  • 4NT Balanced 20HCP. Other ranges are handled via the 2D relay.

The 2 Club Structure

• 1NT 2C
  • 2D
    • Pass To play
      
    • 2M To play
      
    • 2NT Game invitational. The next table discusses the subsequent auction.
      
    • 3m Game invitation needing supporting honors, less so with clubs. Opener sets the contract
      
    • 3M Semi-solid 6+ card suit asking opener to bid game with a maximum. Opener may raise with a small doubleton.

1NT - 2C - 2D - 2NT Continuation

• Pass Declining the invitation
  
• 3C Asking for a four card major
  • 3D No four card major
    
  • 3M A four card suit
    
  • 3NT Both majors four cards long. Opener will transfer to the suit he wants to play.
  
  
• 3Red Breakable transfer, showing a weakish five card major. Responder is welcome to bid 3NT with three small cards.
  
• 3NT Placing the contract.

1NT - 2C - 2D - 2NT - 3C - 3D Continuation

• 3M A good five card major. Responder is welcome to support with three small cards.

The 2H/2S Relay

Two hearts and two spades are used to discover whether opener has a minimum or a maximum and whether he has good support for the major suit bid. Most of the time this tool is used with an invitational hand. However, responder may be thinking that 3NT would be a better contract with a broken six card suit if he is in the game forcing range. Opener’s responses are like OGUST.

• 1NT 2M
  • First step Minimum point count, two or three small cards in support
    
  • Step two Minimum point count, Hxx or xxxx cards in the suit
    
  • Step three Maximum point count, two or three small card support
    
  • Step four Maximum point count, Hxx or xxxx cards in the suit
    
  • Step five Minimum point count, Honor fourth support
    
  • Higher Maximum point count, Honor fourth support, CUE BIDDING WEAKNESS

[awm]

To summarize, there are really only two basic methods here.

(1) Most of responder's bids are to play. When responder holds a good hand, a sequence of relay type bids are used to ask opener to describe shape (starting with 2♣ or 2♦).

(2) Responder describes shape. Many of responder's bids are transfers.

The main tradeoffs are as follows:

Type (1) methods have the advantage that direct signoff bids put a lot of pressure on the opponents. This is especially annoying after opening a weak notrump since it is fairly frequently the case that opponents have game values (although they could also have less than half the deck, making balancing even more dangerous). Type (1) methods also have the advantage that opener can hold relatively few distributions for the 1NT bid (even if allowing 2245 shapes, 5-card majors, and so forth) and therefore it's relatively easy to relay out opener's shape at a low level.

Type (2) methods have the advantage that they will keep the well-described hand on the table. It's pretty easy to make sure the balanced hand will declare; compare this to type (1) methods where any time the contract ends in notrump we will have the hand where exact shape is known declaring the contract. Also, in many cases it makes more sense to have the unbalanced hand describe (people who play relays have observed this on many occasions) primarily because evaluating honors opposite shortness is very important. For example, it makes sense to play 3NT even with an 8-card major fit when opener holds KQJx opposite responder's singleton, whereas you want to play 4M even on a 5-2 when opener holds xxxx opposite singleton. Relaying for opener's shape doesn't really distinguish this sort of stuff.

Anyways, it seems clear both from this description and from top players cards that type (2) responses are much better opposite a STRONG notrump. Opposite a WEAK notrump, there's a lot of arguments in both directions and I probably see more people playing type (1) responses.