[gartinmale]

IMPs, short matches. Good opposition. All red.

---

Partner's 1NT is 10-12, balanced. He could have a five-card major. If he has a four-card major he does not have a five-card minor. The methods are not great, but they're lots of fun and have been doing well.

Your 2♣ would be non-game-forcing Stayman. Partner will bid a major at the 2-level if he has one. If he bids 2♦, a bid of either major by you shows exactly 5 and is invitational. If he bids 2♥, a bid of 2♠ by you is 4-5 spades, invitational. If you bid 3♣ over any Stayman response it is invitational in clubs.

Pass is, of course, what it is.

Which will it be?

[Quantumcat]

I would probably pass. If I had better or longer clubs I would probably invite in clubs (presumably partner will accept whenever he has a fit in clubs). I have a nice takeout double if the opponents try to play in 2♦.

[gwnn]

Pass and hope partner does not have 12 (especially not 12 with 4 spades). I can't see a good way out of this.

[Phil]

Just pass. An easy way to evaluate hands is to subtract five points and pretend you are responding to a 15-17 NT.

By the way, you might be getting completely hosed by the field if you were playing MPs and they are playing their major fit.

[gartinmale]

That's why we don't play this system at matchpoints.

The spots are really good, but passing seems very reasonable (and not insane). What is the minimum change necessary to make the hand worth a call?

[Phil]

Certainly a 4th heart would do it - because you can comfortably bail in 2♥.

[quiddity]

Phil, on 2012-August-21, 19:08, said:

Certainly a 4th heart would do it - because you can comfortably bail in 2♥.

Does 2C-2D-2H promise 4-5 in the majors or does it just show hearts? Either way, can partner pass with a doubleton heart? I would not be comfortable doing this even with a fourth heart.

Still I think it's pretty close to being worth a stayman try. You'll get to some light partials and games when partner doesn't have a fit but maybe the stiff diamond makes it worthwhile to get out of NT. With an extra point it wouldn't even be a problem.

[Quartic]

quiddity, on 2012-August-21, 19:28, said:

Phil, on 2012-August-21, 19:08, said:

Certainly a 4th heart would do it - because you can comfortably bail in 2♥.

Does 2C-2D-2H promise 4-5 in the majors or does it just show hearts? Either way, can partner pass with a doubleton heart? I would not be comfortable doing this even with a fourth heart.

gartinmale, on 2012-August-20, 23:48, said:

Your 2♣ would be non-game-forcing Stayman. Partner will bid a major at the 2-level if he has one. If he bids 2♦, a bid of either major by you shows exactly 5 and is invitational. If he bids 2♥, a bid of 2♠ by you is 4-5 spades, invitational.

(My emphasis.)

It appears that in the OP's methods, you can't easily stop in 2♥, unless partner has 4 hearts.

[Quantumcat]

gartinmale, on 2012-August-21, 18:34, said:

That's why we don't play this system at matchpoints.

10-12 1NT is perfect for matchpoints. At matchpoints, when NV whoever gets to 1NT first wins the board! (I am assuming it's only 10-12 when in 1st/2nd seat not vul)

[the hog]

I would pass this. I agree with Phil that I I had a 4th ♥ I would go via Stayman.

[han]

Everybody is passing but this is a complete crapshoot. Our hand is enormous for a major suit game, but 1NT may well be the limit. Why do we play these methods vulnerable?

I would bid Stayman, bid 2NT over 2D and pass 2H. Over 2S I think we should bid game.

I am not sure what Phil meant but I think that if we were 3-4-1-5 then we should definitely bid Stayman.

[Phil]

Didn't see the system note about 2M being invitational after 2♦.

Even then I've come around to agree with Han here. Passing 1N is a big view. You just know you're getting fielded to death on a hand like this because of your methods.

[ArtK78]

I play 10-12 1NT non-vul in 1st and 2nd seat. I also play that a 2♣ response would be Stayman with less than game forcing values.

You have two choices here - pass or bid 2♣. If you bid 2♣, you intend to pass a 2♥ response, invite game if partner bids 2♠ or bid 3♣ over 2♦ (I do not like 2NT over 2♦).

I would bid 2♣. The chances of improving the contract and/or shutting the opponents out of the auction are too good. The downside would be removing the contract from 1NT when that would have been better than your ultimate contract following the plan outlined above, but that seems to be a very small target.

Another potential downside is that partner might bid 3NT over 3♣, but that might work out OK.

If the hand were 4-3-2-4 instead of 4-3-1-5 I would pass 1NT.

But, as this hand is vul, I would not be in this position.

[gartinmale]

Again, there is no getting fielded to death on this hand - there is only the other table, and they are playing 2/1. 1NT 10-12 may be terrific nonvulnerable at matchpoints; I lack the experience to know, because we play this system only at IMPs. 1NT may be atrocious vulnerable at matchpoints; see the previous note. As for putting ourselves in this position, it's likely that different NT ranges would serve us better in different seats and vulnerabilities. Unfortunately, in first seat at all vulnerabilities we have agreed that it will be 10-12. So, yeah, I do wish I hadn't been in this position. That's why this hand is being posted here, and not one where I had an additional queen.

If there is no interference at the other table, is it possible you will get to the same place as them by bidding? If partner has a full opener, presumably their auction will go

1m - 1S - 2S - 4S

or

1m - 1S - 1NT - 3NT

since we are red at IMPs.

What if partner has 10-11? Maybe he will refuse an invite, and so will the other table?

For the bidders - suppose you were playing your vulnerability treatments and it was all white, or white on red. If you're bidding then, isn't that an argument for bidding red?

[Quantumcat]

gartinmale, on 2012-August-22, 19:09, said:

Again, there is no getting fielded to death on this hand - there is only the other table, and they are playing 2/1. 1NT 10-12 may be terrific nonvulnerable at matchpoints; I lack the experience to know, because we play this system only at IMPs.

The two main advantages to the 10-12 NT:
1. NV, you win the board hands-down at matchpoints if you are allowed to play there (easy to see why - 6 tricks = -50 if we play 1NT, -90 if they play it. 5 tricks is -100 if we play it, -120 if they play it. And if we make the 1NT, turn the previous scores around and make them positive)
2. Pre-empting the opponents, who have no idea whose hand it is, while pard knows all (best coupled with major 2-bids to play, as you seem to have)
3. Continuation of number 2, the opps are always desperate to get into the auction when you open a 10-12 and they seem to end up in the wrong spot more often than not

Number 1 only applies at matchpoints NV, but number 2 applies in any situation. However, at IMPs, there is the extra risk of going for a number on a nothing board (on rare occasions you may find yourselves forced into the auction when you didn't want to be with two mediocre balanced hands). So if you only do it non-vul, you retain full advantage with none of the risk. IMHO you are totally missing out not playing this at matchpoints - it is quite effective!

BTW I have a decent system over 10-12 NT (probably has similarities with the one you already have) and a very effective escape mechanism when doubled, PM me if you want to know them :-)

[gszes]

MINORITY REPORT

I cannot believe the passes here. We have btn 22-24 hcp
with a singleton dia in our hand plus some nice intermediates.
there is all kinds of game potential here and most are happy
to sit by the sidelines. While I am not a huge fan of your system
(at least you could play puppet stayman and show the difference
btn 4/5 card majors) I will start with 2c and
after 2d bid 2n (intending to run to 3c if 2d or 2n is x)
after 2h I will bite the bullet and bid 3h hoping my heart quality makes up for lack of length
after 2s I am bidding 4s.

[Cyberyeti]

ArtK78, on 2012-August-22, 09:25, said:

I play 10-12 1NT non-vul in 1st and 2nd seat. I also play that a 2♣ response would be Stayman with less than game forcing values.

You have two choices here - pass or bid 2♣. If you bid 2♣, you intend to pass a 2♥ response, invite game if partner bids 2♠ or bid 3♣ over 2♦ (I do not like 2NT over 2♦).

I would bid 2♣. The chances of improving the contract and/or shutting the opponents out of the auction are too good. The downside would be removing the contract from 1NT when that would have been better than your ultimate contract following the plan outlined above, but that seems to be a very small target.

Another potential downside is that partner might bid 3NT over 3♣, but that might work out OK.

If the hand were 4-3-2-4 instead of 4-3-1-5 I would pass 1NT.

But, as this hand is vul, I would not be in this position.

This says pretty much my thoughts, the other big potential loser is playing 3♣ when partner is 3352 but I would still bid this over 2♦ rather than 2N.

[Phil]

Sorry, thought this was MPs.

My interest in this thread has waned due to playing a mini-NT vulnerable at teams.