[msheald]

Hello! My understanding of 1NT-2C is that 2C is Stayman - and this was the bid explanation. I'm puzzled why the robot did not bid it as such. Thanks.

Mike

https://tinyurl.com/2n2dlvuz

[DavidKok]

Some people use Stayman also as a way to make invitational bids without a major suit. Perhaps that is what happened here.

[smerriman]

Yes, GIB plays a direct 2NT as a transfer to clubs, so has to go through Stayman to invite. With 4 spades, GIB would have bid 2♠ over your 2♥ bid, so 2NT denies a four card major, and 4♠ over that doesn't exist.

A more popular method if playing minor suit transfers is for an immediate 2♠ to be a dual purpose bid that includes balanced invites as well as hands with clubs, with 2NT a transfer to diamonds, but GIB doesn't play that.

[pescetom]

It's a good idea to read the explanations, which are often (although not always) correct: in this case it clearly says invite with no majors.

[TylerE]

smerriman, on 2023-July-18, 05:39, said:

Yes, GIB plays a direct 2NT as a transfer to clubs, so has to go through Stayman to invite. With 4 spades, GIB would have bid 2♠ over your 2♥ bid, so 2NT denies a four card major, and 4♠ over that doesn't exist.

A more popular method if playing minor suit transfers is for an immediate 2♠ to be a dual purpose bid that includes balanced invites as well as hands with clubs, with 2NT a transfer to diamonds, but GIB doesn't play that.

I think this is a regionalism. Here in the south east old school 4 way (S->C 2N->D) still seems to predominate by a fairly wide margin, at least below the pro level.

The GIB situation is just the worst though... you give up the natural superaccepts (however you want to play them) but don't get either an inv. 2N or a range ask or anything else useful in return.

[johnu]

TylerE, on 2023-July-18, 23:18, said:

The GIB situation is just the worst though... you give up the natural superaccepts (however you want to play them) but don't get either an inv. 2N or a range ask or anything else useful in return.

Who plays superaccepts in response to Stayman? Superaccepts over transfers where responder has shown a 5+ card suit sure, but over Stayman?

[smerriman]

johnu, on 2023-July-19, 01:31, said:

Who plays superaccepts in response to Stayman? Superaccepts over transfers where responder has shown a 5+ card suit sure, but over Stayman?

We're talking about minor suit transfers, which is the reason GIB had to bid Stayman.. GIB's minor suit transfer system doesn't allow superaccepts, which I agree makes it quite suboptimal.

[msheald]

Thank you, all, for your responses. I appreciate them. Best regards.

Mike

[pilowsky]

smerriman, on 2023-July-19, 01:49, said:

We're talking about minor suit transfers, which is the reason GIB had to bid Stayman.. GIB's minor suit transfer system doesn't allow superaccepts, which I agree makes it quite suboptimal.

2S is minor Stayman in GIBerrish and can be 5/4 (I think) but with 8+ HCP so 3NT is a passable response.
I like the 2NT=clubs because it makes lebensohl easier to remember.
The 2NT and 3C bids always promise 6+ so would a superaccept mean that you would have 3+ of the minor and 16-17?

In actual Bridge would a hand with 8-11ish HCP and a 6 card minor be better as a 1NT-3NT auction or should it still go via a transfer?

[smerriman]

pilowsky, on 2023-July-19, 06:23, said:

The 2NT and 3C bids always promise 6+ so would a superaccept mean that you would have 3+ of the minor and 16-17?

Superaccepts of minor suit transfers aren't related to points or length, but fit - they help you find 3NT on minimal values - something like AQx AJx Qxx QJxx opposite xx Qxx KJxxxx xx which is only 16 opposite 6. Responder transfers to diamonds intending to sign off, but a superaccept tells them diamonds are cashing, so 3nt is worth a shot. 17 with xxx wouldn't superaccept.

But since responder still needs to sign off at the 3 level with a very weak hand, the superaccept has to be below the default response, which is why it isn't an option when 3♣ is a transfer to diamonds.

[johnu]

smerriman, on 2023-July-19, 01:49, said:

We're talking about minor suit transfers, which is the reason GIB had to bid Stayman

That makes a lot more sense than what I was thinking.

smerriman, on 2023-July-19, 01:49, said:

GIB's minor suit transfer system doesn't allow superaccepts, which I agree makes it quite suboptimal.

Agree, but this is balanced out by using 2♠ as minor suit Stayman which are difficult hands for the GIB system without MSS. Is this a net loss compared to using 2♠/2NT as transfers to minor suits? I don't know but I think due to relative rarity probably not a big difference either way.

[msheald]

Despite folks teaching, I got caught again.

http://tinyurl.com/23nptpv8

This is very different than what I play. My partner and I would never look for a minor game in this situation with 5 clubs to the jack. In such a situation, we typically bid 3NT. Though I've never run computer simulations, in my play experience, favoring 3NT rather than 3 of a minor gives better match points over the course of a number of hands.

However, the point is not what I would do with my human partner, but rather, understanding what the robot does. Hopefully, I'll remember this in the future! Best regards.

Mike

[smerriman]

I suspect you're still misunderstanding the idea a bit since it's not looking for a minor game, or a minor anything, so your comments about that don't seem relevant.

It's looking for 3nt if you're not a minimum, and 2nt if you are, since it's not strong enough to bid 3nt immediately, and it can't raise 1nt to 2nt which is probably what your partnership would do since that's a club transfer used for completely different hands (like very weak with lots of clubs, where 3♣ will score better than passing 1nt, among others). See the alert of the 2nt bid.

[Gilithin]

msheald, on 2024-February-14, 05:14, said:

Hopefully, I'll remember this in the future!

As was already pointed out, you do not have to remember. All you need to do is read the explanations.

[msheald]

This sounds complex. In basic SA, the sequence 1NT - 2NT shows 8 to 9 points without a 4-card major, so it presents everything discussed above. Of course, it loses the subtleties discussed above as well!

Mike

[mycroft]

It is complex. It's called "4-suit transfers", and it's one of many common ways to handle them (another, of course, is "don't worry about 3-of-a-minor"). What's even more complex is "on a (2♠ or 2NT) transfer, what does bidding the in-between bid mean?" and "what does 1NT-3♣ mean?" But it is a very common method, and while it has its problems, it's one of the more effective of the common methods.

If you've never run into it before, I would be very surprised. Okay, maybe I wouldn't, because despite what the regulations have said for 30 years, people don't Alert that delayed 2NT response - so when you've played against it, you didn't notice.

But it is so common that - as I said before - it's been an Alertable treatment for 30 years in the ACBL: "After Stayman, any call that does not promise a 4-card Major." And GIB did (well, they alert all their calls, but still) - in fact, went farther and *denied* 4 spades.

[Gilithin]

msheald, on 2024-February-15, 05:16, said:

This sounds complex. In basic SA, the sequence 1NT - 2NT shows 8 to 9 points without a 4-card major, so it presents everything discussed above. Of course, it loses the subtleties discussed above as well!

It used to be a very popular method in North America and probably still is at some levels. Advances in theory have generally reduced its use somewhat by better pairs. Nonetheless, if you play with GIB it is your agreed system, so it makes sense to familiarise yourself with it.