[mycroft]

I play range ask. I play - let's say "lots of other weird stuff"(*), too, in that system, but I play range ask.

• 1NT-2NT; p == 1NT-2♠; 2NT-p
  
• 1NT-2NT; 3NT == 1NT-2♠; 3♣-3NT
  
• 1NT-4NT; p == 1NT-2♠; 2NT-3NT (and yes, I've had this auction and made exactly 9 tricks before)

Really, not an issue. And yeah, if you're missing major fits with 2♠, you were doing it on hands you didn't bid 2NT on before, probably for a good reason.

There are downsides:

• If you're not going to play "or clubs", you have to put the clubs in there somewhere, and that includes "invitation with clubs".(**)
  
• If you do put "or clubs" in there, as David says, you lose the "do my clubs run" type of invite that 4-suit transfers uses the superaccept for.
  
• Occasionally, 2♠ gets doubled for a lead (or, rarely, 3♣ gets doubled for a sacrifice).

But it works well, and I'd be happy to use it in a normal NT system with a partner that also played it.

(*)Keri. It's Keri by the book. For the two of you that are enlightened, more power to us.
(**)Keri doesn't start with the "clubs" bid to invite in clubs (it bids clubs and then clubs instead :-). So it doesn't have to worry about superaccepts; partner's going to pass or game-force.

[jdiana]

smerriman, on 2025-February-10, 12:44, said:

If you replace "a natural 2NT bid" with "a hand that would want to make a natural 2NT bid" then the two definitions are identical, aren't they?

Maybe I'm missing something but I think the second definition also includes the possibility of a long club suit, whereas the first one (I think) is just a balanced invitational hand. I'm not sure why that would be better than just bidding 2NT so I probably am missing something.

[smerriman]

Ah, sorry, I see what you mean now. I think that's just a wording detail; the literal meaning of "range ask" is solely the bit that asks about opener's strength, whereas the convention most people play 2♠ as is "range ask or clubs". Some may abbreviate that as "range ask", but don't literally mean "range ask or clubs without the clubs option". If that's not confusing

[jillybean]

I've always asked when players alert 2♠ and explain it as "range ask"; what do you mean, invitational ?
What happened to full disclosure? . Invitational or clubs does not sounds as good.

[jdiana]

smerriman, on 2025-February-10, 13:23, said:

Ah, sorry, I see what you mean now. I think that's just a wording detail; the literal meaning of "range ask" is solely the bit that asks about opener's strength, whereas the convention most people play 2♠ as is "range ask or clubs". Some may abbreviate that as "range ask", but don't literally mean "range ask or clubs without the clubs option". If that's not confusing

I guess mycroft has at least partly answered my question of why playing it as strictly a range ask would be better than just a natural 2NT from responder: you can gain in situations where responder has 16-17 HCP but 4NT would be too high. I don't know if there are any other advantages.

I guess I was asleep when that convention (2NT as just a range ask) was being discussed. I first learned of it as part of 4-way transfers. That, along with 2-way NMF, has I think filtered down from advanced players to intermediate players to the point where, if one is considering adopting NMF or 4-way transfers for the first time, they might as well adopt the "advanced" versions. They're not that much more complicated.

[smerriman]

 jillybean, on 2025-February-10, 13:27, said:

I've always asked when players alert 2♠ and explain it as "range ask"; what do you mean, invitational ?
What happened to full disclosure? . Invitational or clubs does not sounds as good.

Technically the meaning of 2♠ literally is just a range ask - not invitational, not clubs, but bid 2N with a minimum and 3♣ otherwise - in exactly the same way that 2♣ Stayman is a a 4 card major ask.

Of course, in both cases you're entitled to know what types of hands you'd ask on.

[mycroft]

Like any explanation - what does Stayman mean, for instance? - if the quick answer doesn't make sense, ask for clarification.

"I want to know if partner is maximum or minimum for her 1NT opener."

If what you are hoping for is "what does my hand look like to ask", well then, it might be obvious next round. One of the benefits of a "captain auction" is that non-captain is just answering questions, "don't care why, partner's in control"; so we don't have to tell the opponents. I'll happily tell you when I find out - next round.

I mean, yes, it's invitational. And it is almost always invitational to 3NT. But it might be invitational to 6NT. Or 7NT. How do you know? You don't. But neither does partner - all our agreement is is "my next call will depend on whether you're minimum or maximum for your 1NT opener."

Yes, I hear shades of "Psychic Ogust". And yeah, there's a possibility I will have 6 clubs and a 2-count, and "expect" partner to show a maximum. Of course, 1NT-2♠; 2NT-3♣ is GF, so if I guess wrong, I'm playing 2NT with 12 opposite 2. I've never tried that, but you know...

Those who do play it "or clubs", "she's asking me if I'm maximum or minimum. May have a hand that wants to play 3♣, no matter my range."

[smerriman]

mycroft, on 2025-February-10, 13:45, said:

One of the benefits of a "captain auction" is that non-captain is just answering questions, "don't care why, partner's in control"; so we don't have to tell the opponents.

This seems contradictory to law 20F, where the opponents are entitled to know inferences about why partner might be asking a question, even if you don't care.

[mycroft]

Quote

The player is entitled to know about calls actually made, about relevant alternative calls available that were not made, and about inferences from the choice of action where these are matters of partnership understanding.

My emphasis, those words matter.

Here, "partner wants to know whether I'm 12 or bad 13, or 14 or 13 that looks like 14. My experience tells me, whether to be in game or slam I would guess depends on that."

I have to admit it would be hard to keep the response that polite, but I'd succeed. I'm the last person to trot out GBK (in fact, I try to stamp out uses of it), but if "25ish flat is game in NT, 33ish is slam, 37ish is grand. How do I find out whether we meet those numbers?" isn't "inferences drawn from knowledge and experience of matters generally known to bridge players" (40B5a) I'm not sure what is.

If you want information about other options she has, sure, that's (clearly, in my Keri case) "matters of partnership understanding". "We can invite with 4 or more cards in a major, 6 cards in a minor; we can show single-suited, three-suited, 5M-4m, 5M-5+m, 5m-4M, and 5-4 majors or minors, or ask for a 4 or 5 card Major, all Game Forcing. Some auctions are clearly slam invitational, some are just game unless partner continues. We play 1NT-4NT as straight-ace Blackwood."

All of which (except the last), I would again expect "bridge players" to assume we have a way of doing - but likely not be able to guess how, in many cases.

The issue I have with Psychic Ogust (or "inviting" with clubs and a poor hand here, hoping to steal the hand from the opponents) is that the "inferences drawn [by] bridge players" to "I want to know if partner's suit or outside cards are good" is "because I'm interested in game if they are sufficiently good"; and hiding the information that "well, especially when partner opens 2♠, I might instead have 3 spades and 3 high" for as long as possible, just in case these opponents can't work it out, is deliberately ignoring "generally".

The fact that my agreements sometimes don't tell specific things about the asker's hand has caused issues in the past, such as when 1♠-3♣ meant "4 spades, go on a Goren opener" and 1♠-3♦ meant "4 spades, go only if, had you konwn of the spade fit, you would have opened (Precision) 1♣". "How many points?" "Enough that he thinks we can make game if I have a decent 13/a supermax". That's our agreement, sorry. If you want to ask "how aggressive do you push to game, counting Meckwell as a 10 and the intro to bridge students as a 1?", okay, I can answer that. But I can't tell you how many points that shows, because I don't know and I don't need to know.

Now puppets, that's a whole different story. There's a defined set of hand types that will make the puppet, and you *should* be able to itemize them. Of course, Keri 2♣ even I summarize, because itemizing them is about 6 lines of dense text, so: "wants to play 2♦ or various invitational or better hands, with or without diamonds." Has been sufficient in the past; I've got across the crucial nature of "partner might pass my [forced] 2♦ call; if she doesn't have that hand, we have the balance of power" that is needed to make your calls this round. But I can do it, if someone asks.

I do notice that nobody's expecting the same level of detail over everyone else's (absolutely equivalent 95% of the time) 1NT-2NT (and the other 5% of the time, it's a slam-try auction and you won't have a hand that wants to get in anyway), and in fact, would look at you funny if you asked "so what do you know about her hand?" despite the fact that we know she doesn't have a 4-card major or a 6-card minor or a 10 count or a 2 count or...

Or Stayman (despite the fact that there are many more hands that are possible in a Stayman auction than in a "range ask" 2♠ call)! If they answer "asking whether I have a 4 card major", are they in the same boat (could they not have a 4-card major? Is 2M after 2♦ to play or invitational? Can you respond 2NT or higher with specific hands (and therefore 2♣ promises invitational values at least)? What's a 3m (or a 3M) rebid - does it guaranteee a (both) major(s)? Does it deny a game-forcing hand? I'm sure I'm missing some oddities of versions of Stayman I've played before).

[steve2005]

If opening 1NT with a 5-card major you need to be using Puppet Stayman
1) 2C as Puppet Stayman. upside you can use on Invitational or GF hands. Downside you lose crawling Stayman and your garbage Stayman is on different set of hands. Rest of your system remains unchanged.
2) 3C as Puppet Stayman (or you can use 2N as Puppet Stayman if 2S is range ask or clubs and 3C is diamonds) You can only use on GF hands

[johnu]

mycroft, on 2025-February-10, 13:07, said:

There are downsides:

• If you're not going to play "or clubs", you have to put the clubs in there somewhere, and that includes "invitation with clubs".(**)
  
• If you do put "or clubs" in there, as David says, you lose the "do my clubs run" type of invite that 4-suit transfers uses the superaccept for.
  
• Occasionally, 2♠ gets doubled for a lead (or, rarely, 3♣ gets doubled for a sacrifice).

As is usually the case, there is no free lunch when making artificial bids. As noted, the immediate problem is that 2♠ can be doubled for lead directing purposes. Also, even if 2♠ isn't doubled, the lack of a double can also help the opening leader. 2♠ (and also the natural invitational 2NT) announce that the bidder wasn't interested in looking for a major suit contract. That leads to what Bird and Anthias call the major suit bias.