[steve2005]

I have a question of 2N system. Also use Kokish relays so there are 2 3N rebids
current system

3C=puppet Stayman which reveals more than std.
--------3D=no 44M, 5S, 4H
3D/3H=transfers
3S=Minor suit Stayman
3N=to play includes 4333 hands (designed for imps)
4C=transfer to D
4D/4H=Texas
4S=transfer to C - this high is what am thinking of changing4N=Quantitative
4N=Quantitative

Alternative 1:

3C=Puppet Stayman but use on all hands that would normally bid 3N
3N=Transfer to C


Advantages
Long club hands are very convenient to bid
Ability to sign off in 3N after minor suit stayman
Long diamond hands very convenient


Disadvantage
3N as conventional is easy to forget
Information leakage from extra use of Stayman
Possible extra lead directing X from use of Stayman

Alternative 2
3S=Puppet to 3N
rebids then
4C/4D= long minor , can reverse and have 4C=D and 4D=C
4H/4S=slam try with short major and both minors
4N=both minors, no slam try

Advantages

can show clubs lower
Can use 4C=Gerber

Disadvantage
cant play in 3N as can with minor suit Stayman with both minors
showing both minors higher so lose space





Any comments? suggestions open to other ideas

[ArtK78]

I have a comment. What is this discussion doing in the Natural Bidding Forum?

Without getting into specifics, with my regular partner I play 4-suit transfers and Puppet Stayman over 2NT openings and 2NT rebids after a 2♣ opening.

[steve2005]

 ArtK78, on 2015-July-02, 11:51, said:

I have a comment. What is this discussion doing in the Natural Bidding Forum?

Without getting into specifics, with my regular partner I play 4-suit transfers and Puppet Stayman over 2NT openings and 2NT rebids after a 2♣ opening.

transfers are so common, puppet Stayman iisnt even alertable in north America. Puppet bids are just transfer which don't show a specific meaning yet which are also somewhat common. Nonnatural for more esoteric bidding

[mikeh]

In one partnership I play a very complex method that includes 3♠ as a puppet to 3N, either to play or a slam-interest (4441) or a indifferent single suit minor slam try. Frankly in probably 2000+ hands I can't recall the single suit minor ever happening and the 4441 is very rare as well.....99% of the 3♠ calls are to play in 3N.

I read some pretty strong criticism of using 3♠ to puppet to 3N, based on the ease of a double and the inference from no double, so that this gadget makes the defence a little easier than after a simple 3N raise. I haven't seen the issue at the table, at least in terms of the lead-directing double, but that is purely happenstance. I do think it a flaw.

One possibility, that I have used in several partnerships, is to use the 3♦ call as either hearts or (insert various hand types). Having responder being able to bid 3♠ over acceptances to trigger 3N followed by various bids helps, and here the directing double of 3♠ is less of an issue since the partnership won't be playing 3N.

Designing a comprehensive structure is difficult because of space constraints, so nesting different hands in one initial action makes sense. Btw, if you do this, make sure that opener's only superaccept is 3♠ over which responder bids 3N with hearts (memory alert!) and bids at the 4-level as if the auction had gone 2N 3D 3H 3S 3N.

[Zelandakh]

I have posted my structure often enough. In slightly simplified form:-

3♣ = Puppet
... - 3♦ = 4 hearts and/or 3-4 spades
... - ... - 3♥ = spade ask
... - ... - ... - 3♠ = 4 spades
... - ... - ... - 3NT = <4 spades
... - ... - 3♠ = 4 hearts
... - ... - 3NT = 4-4 majors, NF
... - ... - 4♣ = 4+-4+ majors, SI
... - ... - 4♦ = pick a major (assume 54♥
... - ... - 4♥ = 5♣4♦
... - ... - 4♠ = 5♦4♣
... - 3M = 5 suit
... - 3NT = <4 hearts, <3 spades
3♦ = 5+ hearts
... - 3♥
... - ... - 3♠ = nat 3NT rebid or 4+ clubs
... - ... - 3NT = 4 spades, NF
... - ... - 4♣ = 4+ diamonds
... - ... - 4♦ = 5+ spades
3♥ = 5+ spades
3♠ = 5+ clubs
... - 3NT = no fit
... - ... - 4♣ = 6+ clubs
... - ... - 4♦ = 5+ diamonds, no void
... - ... - 4M = 5+ diamonds + void M
3NT = nat
4♣ = 6+ diamonds
4♦ = 6+ hearts
4♥ = 6+ spades
4♠ = range ask Baron

The key is the use of 4M after Puppet to handle the 5-4 minor hands. That gets these out of the way and allows 3♠ to handle only one-suited clubs and minor two-suiters. You can achieve more efficiency by playing the 3NT response artificially but that has its own disadvantages.

[steve2005]

Yes ,Zelandakh very good. your in effect using 3♠ for MSS or ♣ which enables you not use 3N which as you say has problems (forgetfulness the big one)

Like my puppet Stayman better (probably more that I'm used to it than anything else-looks likes yours handles same hands just different order) and mine handles (31)(54) also

[Zelandakh]

 steve2005, on 2015-July-03, 06:57, said:

Like my puppet Stayman better (probably more that I'm used to it than anything else-looks likes yours handles same hands just different order) and mine handles (31)(54) also

There are a number of Puppet versions that handle 5♠4♥ hands, which is the main type we tend to be discussing. The version I gave has an advantage on the (31)(54) hands because after 2NT - 3♣; 3NT, Responder knows there is a fit, whereas this is not the case when a direct 3NT is used for 4-4 majors. On the flip side, it is a disadvantage that Responder has to ask about a 4 card spade suit just to get to 3NT, leaking information and opening up a potentially harmful double of 3♥. There are some other differences too but I think this comes under the heading of personal preference and I see no reason why the structure should suffer from such a change, nor for Muppet or any of the other alternatives for that matter.

We have actually had many threads discussing 2NT structures over the past couple of years, not least because a former poster here was fascinated with certain aspects of this area of bidding. You can certainly find plenty of additional food for thought if you run a search.

[benlessard]

after 3C-3D-3H as a spades ask that is imo better is

3S= 3S
3NT= 2S 3H by inference if you dont open 2NT with 22(45)
4C+= 4S

or

3S= 3S
3NT= 2S 3H by inference if you dont open 2NT with 22(45)
4C+= 5S

Also better is to use 3NT as 5H rather than 4-4 in the majors.

[Zelandakh]

 benlessard, on 2015-July-04, 00:21, said:

after 3C-3D-3H as a spades ask that is imo better is

3S= 3S
3NT= 2S 3H by inference if you dont open 2NT with 22(45)
4C+= 4S

This is not possible in the version I mentioned as you need to go via 3♥ to reach 3NT even without any interest in spades.

[FrancesHinden]

On simple approach is to use 2-under slam tries at the 4-level

4C = slam try in hearts
4D = slam try in spades
4H = slam try in clubs
4S = slam try in diamonds

(I actually use these in addition to an artificial 3S and 3NT response to 2NT, but it's not necessary to do so)

Over 4C/4D as opener, you have to choose between right-siding and getting more distinction on the hand types. We play
- step 1 = either complete rejection or 5-level drive with a cue in step 1
- step 2 (partner's suit) = mild interest
- higher = keycard (4S/4NT) - in practice, it's rare for anything else to be bid, but if it were, it would be a cue without the ace of the step 1 suit

Over 4H/4S we play
- 4NT sign-off
- the intermediate suit keycard in partner's minor
- 5m to play (rare)
- higher - cue

(We should play something more sophisticated here, but we don't)

The slam tries are always single-suited and promise 6 cards, because we have alternative ways to show a 5332 slam try, or to show any two-suiters.

[benlessard]

Quote

This is not possible in the version I mentioned as you need to go via 3♥ to reach 3NT even without any interest in spades.

That why the other version is better.

[benlessard]

In romex i know

3M=4M
3D=5S or no M
3NT=5H

however

after 3C-3D-??

3H= ask for 5S/to play 3NT or 5S+5H
3S = 4H+5S
3NT = 5S+4H

is inferior because over the responder rebid of 3H opener cannot bypass 3NT.
Its just better if 3H is a S ask (implying some M+M hands or 4S+5m hands) so that opener can use all the responses from 3S to 4S.

3S = 3S
3NT = 2S
4c+ = 4S+ or 5S+ depending on the meaning of 3C-3S

I play a strong club so i dont rememeber all the ramification but its kind of clear that after 3C-3D-3H if opener cannot bypass 3NT your system can be improved.

[blackshoe]

 benlessard, on 2015-July-05, 17:23, said:

In romex i know

(snip)

I must be missing something. That doesn't look anything like the Romex structure that I know.

[benlessard]

yes its one where 4S+4H is in 3H and 5H is in 3NT rather that the other way around.

There is 3 advantages.

1- after 3C-3NT you only have H to worry about rather than H+S

2- after 3C-3H-3S asking for 5H you get more lead directing double since opener cannot have 4S.

3- You can use 3S as showing 4S (instead of showing 3H) so opener can respond with keycards up to 4S *avoiding lead directing X) or you can use 3S= relay to 3NT or other stuff and 3NT ask for 4S not forcing. This give you more overall sequence than the cases where 3H maybe be 4or5H.

Anyway its irrelevant because even better are system where opener can bid over 3NT after 3C-3D-3H-?? If your system is able to do this it will be slightly more precise than other schemes.

[blackshoe]

Again, this doesn't seem to be anything I've read from Rosenkranz. Where's it from?

[benlessard]

Here in Montreal most players play regular stayman or Romex rather than puppet stayman, so it could be a local innovation but here nobody play Romex in its classic form of 3H is 4 or 5H and 3NT is 4S+4H. Canada play vs Mexico the 3rd spot in the WBF zone. So maybe its an import or came from a discussion with Rosenkraz. I know my friend who told me this improvement meet Rosenkraz several times. Ive had the chance to meed him once and hs french is excellent and i know that hes speak 6 or 7 languages.

Also possible is that initially it was meant as a simplification not as an improvement.

3H show 4,3S show 4 and the exception are in 3D/3NT look simpler to teach than 3S show 5 3H is 4 or 5.

Also since opener is more likely to have a 4M than a 5M there is less re-transfer considerations especially after 3C-3NT.

[blackshoe]

<shrug>. I suppose you can call any convention whatever you like. But I wouldn't call the convention you describe "Romex Stayman", since as far as I know it's not played anywhere as part of Romex, and there's another convention so named which is part of Romex as described in the several books by Rosenkranz that I have on that system. OTOH, I may not be remembering correctly the versions in some of the older books. I'll have to check that.

[Zelandakh]

 benlessard, on 2015-July-05, 17:23, said:

its kind of clear that after 3C-3D-3H if opener cannot bypass 3NT your system can be improved.

One can say the same thing that if 2NT - 3♣; 3♦ - 3NT is an end sequence your system can be improved. This a case of swings and roundabouts. All methods have a dead sequence or two because at some point you need to be able to get out in 3NT.

[benlessard]

 Zelandakh, on 2015-July-06, 01:52, said:

One can say the same thing that if 2NT - 3♣; 3♦ - 3NT is an end sequence your system can be improved. This a case of swings and roundabouts. All methods have a dead sequence or two because at some point you need to be able to get out in 3NT.

Either 3NT is to play (like i dont want to know if you have 4S) and 3H is a real ask (showing 4or5S) or you bid 3NT to show something and 3H can be a fake ask. Fake ask are just slightly inferior because not only you leak info on hands where you just want to play 3NT but you give them lead directing X for free.

3C-3D-3H is the sequence you want to minimize the frequency.
3C-3H-3S is the 2nd worse.

Also with my switch you can handle all 5M+3M/5M+4M via 3C IIRC so transfer to H followed by 3S is showing some shapes while Xfer to H and 3NT is a 5332 while with yours you have 5H+4S under the transfer.

[Zelandakh]

What are your follow-ups after 2NT - 3♣; 3♥? I would guess that you either wrong-side playing natural or use 3♠ puppet; 3NT=4 spades, nf; and commit to the 4 level with a slammy hand and 4 spades. Or have you something cleverer?