[Liversidge]

With both of my partners I play Acol, weak no trump, Stayman and Transfers. With the more advanced partner we use the 2S response as a transfer into a minor. With the other partner we did not have that agreement, so when I had a six card club suit headed by AK and no other HCP, I bid 2C, and after partner's response I bid 3C. Partner figured out what I meant and passed.
Afterwards I wondered what that sequence would have meant to my more experienced partner. What sort of holding would he have expected?

[P_Marlowe]

your approach is certainly sensible, although non standard.

A simple hard fast rule in constructive bidding is, that new suits on the 3 level
generate a game forcing auction, unless explicitly agreed otherwise.

We play 3m as showing 5+ in the minor, and 4 cards in the other major / in an unknown
major (after a 2D response).
Over a major suit response by partner, bidding the other major on the 3 level
create a game forcing, and showes a fit for partners major.

In general, if you dont have transfers for the minors, you cant get out in the minor,
and it is often not necessary.

Having a AKxxxx in NT is quite handy, 3m requires two more tricks.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[helene_t]

Obviously you need a way to show a weak hand with long clubs. Especially when playing weak nt.

So if you don't have a transfer to clubs (what would a 2♠ response to 1NT mean, then?), you need either of these
1NT-3♣
or
1NT-2♣
2x-3♣
to show a weak hand with long clubs. It probably doesn't matter too much as long as you and your partner are on the same wavelenth. Beginners in England are taught that bidding via Stayman is weak.

If you do play transfers to minor suits, 2♣ followed by 3♣ is commonly played as forcing although a few play it as invitational. And a few play it as an artificial forcing bid.

[Liversidge]

 helene_t, on 2014-July-30, 02:17, said:

Obviously you need a way to show a weak hand with long clubs. Especially when playing weak nt.

So if you don't have a transfer to clubs (what would a 2♠ response to 1NT mean, then?), you need either of these
1NT-3♣
or
1NT-2♣
2x-3♣
to show a weak hand with long clubs. It probably doesn't matter too much as long as you and your partner are on the same wavelenth. Beginners in England are taught that bidding via Stayman is weak.

If you do play transfers to minor suits, 2♣ followed by 3♣ is commonly played as forcing although a few play it as invitational. And a few play it as an artificial forcing bid.

The modern ACOl system file says that 1NT - 3C/3D/3H/3S "show strong suits with slam interest. I wondered whether 1NT-2C - 2X- 3C/D might indicate a stronger holding than 1NT-2S- 3C/D, which is supposed to be used with a very weak 6+ card minor. My clubs were better than this.

[helene_t]

No it doesn't indicate a stronger holding. But if you play both as forcing, a direct 3♣ bid denies a 4-card major, while stayman followed by 3♣ shows a 4-card major.

[gordontd]

 P_Marlowe, on 2014-July-30, 02:07, said:

your approach is certainly sensible, although non standard.

Actually in the context he gives (Acol with no transfers to the minors) it is the traditional method.

[Zelandakh]

What Gordon said. The traditional way of showing a weak takeout in clubs is Stayman followed by 3♣. In these days of everything going through a transfer this approach has become uncommon but the Acol Club is one of the places where these classical methods are still seen.

As for what might be shown by 1NT - 2♣; 2red - 3♣, that is completely a matter for partnership agreement. Some possibilities:-

1. weak takeout - the traditional method as already described
2. natural, forcing, non-promisary - shows a good hand with clubs
3. natural, forcing, promisary - shows a good hand with clubs and a 4 card major
4. natural, invitational - became briefly popular in the 1980s and is still used in some quarters
5. modified extended Stayman (only over 2♦) - an alternative to Smolen where 3♣ asks for Opener's 3 card major suit fragment
6. transfer - second round transfers are increasingly popular and using 3♣ to show diamonds here is a good option

7. weak takeout, promisary - weak with long clubs and an unbid 4 card major (added as an edit from CY's post #8)

Generally, in the system outlined by the OP option #1 would be normal. If 2♠ shows a minor suit takeout and 3m is a natural invite then #2 would be implied. If 4-way (minor suit) transfers are used then #3 would be expected. I would never assume any of #4, #5 and #6 (or #7) without explicit agreement.

[Cyberyeti]

Zel, you can add what we play.

We use a variant of the 2♠ weak with either minor (with some strong hands in there too), 1N-3any is slam try ish

So 1b - WTO with 4 cards in an unbid major meaning 1N-2♣-2♥-3♣-3♠ is a valid auction

[Zelandakh]

 Cyberyeti, on 2014-July-30, 06:40, said:

Zel, you can add what we play.

Done.

In truth I did not mean the list to be exhaustive. Transfers can also be promisary or non-promisary, for example. I figured it was enough to give some common variations along with a couple of extra ideas for the imaginative advancing player.

[blackshoe]

I like Boston Jacoby, although I haven't thought about it in a weak NT context. Briefly:

2♠: Range inquiry, holding either a raise to 2NT, or a long club suit either weak or slam invitational.
....2NT: Minimum. Responder passes, or bids 3♣, or bids a new suit as a help suit slam try (or a control bid, by agreement).
....3: Maximum. Responder bids 3NT, or passes, or bids a new suit.

2NT: transfer, holding either long diamonds weak, or long diamonds slam going, or both minors weak, or both minors slam going.
....3♣: better clubs. Responder bids 3♦ (weak), or bids a new suit (diamonds, slam going), or passes (both minors, weak), or bids 3NT (both minors, slam going).
....3[♦: better diamonds than clubs. Responder passes, or bids a new suit, or bids 3NT.

This frees up the direct 3♣ and 3♦ for other things, such as Puppet Stayman.

[Liversidge]

I have another occasional partner who has a system not to far away from Boston Jacoby. Stayman and Transfers, with:
1NT – 2NT “I have exactly 12 HCP, no 4 card major”
1NT - 2S . "I may have exactly 11 HCP, or I may have a long minor suit" Opener rebids:
2NT with (12 HCP). Partner then chooses between passing, or bidding a minor suit.
3C with (14 HCP). Partner then chooses between 3NT, passing, or bidding diamonds.

One expert has criticised this mechanistic system, pointing out that there are good and bad 11HCP hands But I would have thought that this 'quality' judgment could be applied here - for example "I may have a hand worth exactly 11HCP..."

[mycroft]

 P_Marlowe, on 2014-July-30, 02:07, said:

your approach is certainly sensible, although non standard.

 gordontd, on 2014-July-30, 04:00, said:

Actually in the context he gives (Acol with no transfers to the minors) it is the traditional method.

Yes, I was going to say "change 'non-standard' to 'very old-fashioned'".

That doesn't mean it's bad - it works quite well. It's just that 1NT-2♣-2♥-3♣ GF, 4♠-5+♣ works better.

[Vampyr]

 blackshoe and others, on 2014-July-30, 07:22, said:

<loads of stuff inappropriate for the Novice and Beginner Forum>

Is a 2♠ response idle for you at the moment? Use it as a weak takeout in a minor. You can add 2-suited minor slam tries if you want.

[kenrexford]

FWIW, an easy tweak to 2S as one minor is to have Opener bid 2NT if he prefers diamonds, 3C if he prefers clubs. This allows 2S to still possibly be one minor, because Opener shows diamond preference below 3C. What it gains is two things. First, if Responder has a weak minor two-suited hand, he bids the minor Opener prefers. Second , if Responder bids a major next, as a two-suited minor, bidding the shortness, with slam interest, both partners know what minor is agreed as trumps.

FWIW II, another option after Stayman is Minor Suit Smolen, where Responder bids the other minor to show a minor. You lose the minimal benefit of a natural 3D call after 3C natural. You gain right siding diamonds when Opener showed a major. And, if you want it, you can get out at 3D without giving up on a forcing sequence.

[1eyedjack]

If you want simple, I suggest that you should not fear languishing in 1N.

You have to make 3 extra tricks in a minor to justify removing 1N to 3m and profit from the decision.

And they have yet to double 1N. And if they do, you might get out for 2m.

If you could bid 3m immediately to play, then it would have some pre-emptive effect, but pussy-footing around to 3m is unlikely to have any more pressure effect that simply passing 1N.

[mgoetze]

 blackshoe and others, on 2014-July-30, 07:22, said:

<loads of stuff inappropriate for the Novice and Beginner Forum>

It's exactly this sort of post that makes me sad we are no longer allowed to downvote.

[Lovera]

Perhaps is not this the just topic but (being Stayman) however never is told about 2♦ Stayman to find fit in a minor suit ? 1NT (15-17) - 2♦(=when partner has void or a singleton generally in a major suit) asking if opener has a stopper in one or both of major suits. I can continue if interested but this convention is in the book "Do you play Stayman" edit by Odyssey Press of New York.(Lovera)