Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Christopher Monsour
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course, while relatively few people play forcing Stayman over 1NT openings, many play it over a 1NT rebid. They just call it by a different name!
Oct. 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you dump Stayman entirely over a strong NT and go to a fully responder-describes system, you don't have to worry as much about opener's being offshape with a 5M422 or 6m322.

With traditional methods, holding a six-card minor is more of a liability at IMPs than at matchpoints, since slams matter more at IMPs.
Oct. 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I play opener describes (not two-way Stayman, but something similar) over a weak NT, but I am not very fond of it. Frequently what you need to know to find the right game or slam is the quality of high-cards in the balanced hand opposite the responder's singleton. Unfortunately, Stayman and transfers aren't the complete answer since Stayman is an opener-describes convention. There are non-Stayman treatments that are much more purely responder-describes, but I don't play often enough any more to bother with the memory load.
Oct. 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One can also use 2 (and 3 over 2) as artificial re-asks after ordinary Stayman to get opener's shape, which frees up 2 to be any other meaning you might want, whether that be to play, transfer, or a multi-meaning bid like an invite in any suit (5+ major or 6+ minor).
Oct. 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sure, you can play it that way. It seems a lot more useful over a weak NT for 3 to be natural and to play, so they can't make a cards double of a 2NT puppet.
Oct. 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If 1NT-2NT is a natural invite, then 1NT-2-2-2NT shows four spades.
Oct. 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You lose a lot more matchpoints going down one in 3 of a major than in 3 of a minor.
Oct. 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Barry's obviously confused. Flannery is a 2 treatment, not a 2 convention. :)
Oct. 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Umm, can you tell us your methods here? Otherwise you'll get a bunch of answers all assuming different methods that happen to be most familiar to each respondent.
Oct. 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2, 2, 2NT, 3, and 3 are all possible. I like 2NT the least, though. At the table I'd go with either 2 (the suit I can most safely correct back to spades) or 3 (I'd rather call this a six-card suit than call a three-card spade holding four-card support).
Oct. 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What do I vote for to indicate I object to the 2 call? If I can't call this better than a minimum when I know partner has at least four spades, I should go back to one-way Drury and get my natural 2 bid back!
Oct. 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pass again
Oct. 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Does 1NT-2-2-3NT say “bid 4 if you have four spades”? Or does it just say “now that I know you have 4-5 hearts, we should play 3NT”? The latter certainly makes some logical sense, though it leads to pretty revealing auctions when you just wanted to find out about a four-card spade holding with a hand that didn't want to risk 2 getting doubled for the lead.
Oct. 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This depends a bit on whether the opponents' auction guarantees an 8-card fit.
Assuming it does, I don't want to defend and I don't want to be in a six-card fit. Partner clearly has at least one 5+ card minor to go with his heart void and 3-4 spades. So I ask him to bid it. At worst, we'll be in a 5-2 club fit.
Oct. 13, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You might trouble to notice that I actually referenced the ACBL. Please don't be intentionally obtuse.
Oct. 5, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That should have been posted as a separate problem. The real problem is interesting enough that many people who, like me, would never have considered responding 1NT will give straight answers.
Oct. 4, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I suspect it may well be designed to give an unnamed player the impression that he (or she) is giving 2/1 a bad name!
Oct. 4, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't suppose you'd want to test Pass, 1NT, or 3 (assuming GiB could be told to take 3 as fit-showing) on those same hands? It would be a lot of work, since those bids would presumably show some of their gains from improving partner's opening lead decision.
Oct. 4, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And then there is the famous example of American football. Winning is highly positively correlated with kneel-down plays. Therefore, in order to win a game, run a kneel-down play at every opportunity….
Oct. 4, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I should add that this was in the days before 1NT opening ranges were announced. (At that point or shortly thereafter, they obviously got rid of the pre-alert requirement.)
Oct. 4, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top