[jmcilkley]

It's amazing how many different ways of playing have been suggested. 2s as 11 points only is rather a waste of a bid as you can use Baron 2s to show 11 or 18+ (if playing 12-14 nt). With a min 1nt opening rebid 2nt and with a max bid 3 of cheapest 4 card suit. Now responder can bid game with 11 points and look for a slam with 18+ if there is a fit. As for bidding 2nt with 12 - I would just bid 3nt with most 12 point hands with any useful feature.
Playing full transfers does allow you to bid 3nt with support for the minor. Breaking the transfer without 3 cards to an honour in the suit allows you to stop in 3 of the minor while completing the transfer to show 3 with an honour may allow responder to try 3nt with a pretty solid 6 card suit.

[jallerton]

jmcilkley, on 2014-October-17, 08:33, said:

It's amazing how many different ways of playing have been suggested.

It's also amazing how many people seem convinced that their own methods are superior to all others.

[DAVDJ1]

helene_t, on 2014-October-15, 05:50, said:

It seems to be expert standard (including wannabe experts) to play, after partner's 1NT opening:
2♣ followed by 2NT: Denies four spades if opener bid 2♥
2♣ followed by 2♠ (if opener bids 2♥): four spades, invitational
2NT: Diamonds

Some invert 2♠ and 2NT after the 2♥ rebid, and some play something similar to GIBerish with 2NT->clubs, but in any case "everybody" bids 2♣ when holding 8-9 points balanced without a four-card major.

It strikes me as extremely inefficient. I understand that opener doesn't care about responder's four-card major when the rebid is 2♦, and doesn't care about responder's four hearts when the rebid is 2♠. So superficially it has some appeal. But even if you insist in using the direct 2NT bid for something artificial, wouldn't it be much better, when holding a balanced hand with 8-9 points and no 4-card major, just to pass with 8 and blast with 9?

Pass-and-blast would be marginally less accurate because opener is in a better position to decide opposite 8-9 than responder is opposite 15-17. But:
- You play 1NT instead of 2NT with 15+8 points.
- You don't leak information about opener's major suit holding when you don't care about it.
- You don't tell opps whether you are in a tight game or not, and you don't tell them about opener's HCPs.
- They can't double 2♣ (or make some lead-directing bid).
- The 2♠ bid can be used for something else. If nothing else fits in your structure, you can always define it as a weak hand with four spades and longer diamonds (including 4144, allowing opener to suggest 3♣ just in case).

Any thoughts?

[DAVDJ1]

Bergen responses solve many of the problems: 1nt p 2cl, p 2d= both majors & 15-bad16 2h=min w/h not s, 2nt=min no major, 3cl= ma, no maj 3d= max both majs, 3h= max h not sp, 3sp=max sp not h. I use this with my regular P

[aguahombre]

jallerton, on 2014-October-17, 09:26, said:

It's also amazing how many people seem convinced that their own methods are superior to all others.

That is to be expected. Some of those people might even be right. Some might even recognize other people's methods are superior for other people, but not for themselves.

I like seeing all those methods. There are reasons beyond stubbornness that we don't adopt superior methods. In this case, we don't want to change six or seven other parts of our NT structure in order to do it.

[Vampyr]

DAVDJ1, on 2014-October-17, 10:29, said:

Bergen responses solve many of the problems: 1nt p 2cl, p 2d= both majors & 15-bad16 2h=min w/h not s, 2nt=min no major, 3cl= ma, no maj 3d= max both majs, 3h= max h not sp, 3sp=max sp not h. I use this with my regular P

I think that most people prefer being able to bid Stayman with weak hands.

[jallerton]

DAVDJ1, on 2014-October-17, 10:29, said:

Bergen responses solve many of the problems: 1nt p 2cl, p 2d= both majors & 15-bad16 2h=min w/h not s, 2nt=min no major, 3cl= ma, no maj 3d= max both majs, 3h= max h not sp, 3sp=max sp not h. I use this with my regular P

I agree. This informative system will help to solve many defensive problems.

[Jinksy]

jallerton, on 2014-October-16, 14:08, said:

It's true that a double of 2♠ is higher frequency that a double of 2♣ when Responder has no major. However, a downside of the 2♣ response also gives the next hand a chance to direct the lead of any suit by doubling with clubs, overcalling at the 2-level in any suit other than clubs.

Do you find this happens often enough to be a comparable risk? I haven't played much nonpromissory Stayman compared to the amount of rangefinding I've played, but I've definitely found the easy X of the latter be a constant concern. By comparison I hardly remember any overcalls when I've been playing promissory Stayman, which intuitively I would guess isn't much less likely to suffer them.

When they do have the strength to overcall, I'd guess it's reasonably often going to keep you out of a non-making 3N anyway, assuming neither of you is strong enough in their suit to penalise them for it.

[jallerton]

Jinksy, on 2014-October-18, 05:00, said:

Do you find this happens often enough to be a comparable risk? I haven't played much nonpromissory Stayman compared to the amount of rangefinding I've played, but I've definitely found the easy X of the latter be a constant concern. By comparison I hardly remember any overcalls when I've been playing promissory Stayman, which intuitively I would guess isn't much less likely to suffer them.

When they do have the strength to overcall, I'd guess it's reasonably often going to keep you out of a non-making 3N anyway, assuming neither of you is strong enough in their suit to penalise them for it.

In 4th seat, one of the main purposes of overcalling here is to direct the lead (in fact the main purpose if the 1NT opening was strong), so I think overcalling here implies a decent suit rather than general strength.

Stayman is bid on so many hand types with a major then the 'normal' Stayman hand type will be more commonly held than the raise to 2NT without a major, even when 4th hand has overcalled.

Doubling the 2♠ or 2♣ response isn't risk free, and Opener should be ready to redouble with a good 4- or 5-card holding in the suit doubled.

[jdeegan]

The most efficient set of responses to a 1NT opening bid I know of was devised by Marshall Miles back in the early 1990's for use with Meckwell's 10-13 HCP Kamikazi opener. I once whiled away an eight hour car trip going through all its myriad variations. It was based on a sort of 2 way puppet Stayman w/o xfers.

It's almost enough to make me want to go back to playing the old Kamikazi 1NT. Only problem with it was (and I actually saw this in a Grand National Team trial event in Jackson, MS) "Board 6?" "+1280" "Push".

[MickyB]

jdeegan, on 2014-October-23, 00:32, said:

It's almost enough to make me want to go back to playing the old Kamikazi 1NT. Only problem with it was (and I actually saw this in a Grand National Team trial event in Jackson, MS) "Board 6?" "+1280" "Push".

2NXX+3 or 4MXX+2?

[jdeegan]

MickyB, on 2014-October-23, 02:33, said:

2NXX+3 or 4MXX+2?

The former. I wish I could remember the auction. It was the same at both tables.