[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.