[jillybean]

In an auction where 1nt opener holds a 5card major and the bidding starts 1N:2N, opener could bid 3♠ saying we have game but I think it might play better in 4♠, I have 5 do you have 3?
The opener may be worried about one of the other suits not being solid, would this be useful or just be giving the opps free information?

After 1N:2♣ stayman I’m using 3♠ to show 5 and force game in NT or ♠
I will of course alert all this

Comments please,
tyia
jb

[Winstonm]

The tradeoff here is that you cannot use "garbage stayman" when holding a weak
4441 or 3451 pattern. If that is no concern and 2C always shows at least invitational values, then you might as well play Puppet Stayman.

[barmar]

Because of the problem Winston mentions, one recommendation is to only jump to 3M with a maximum -- you're less likely to get too high when responder is weak.

Although in this case there's little need to show the 5-card suit immediately -- the auction will usually go 1NT-2♣-2M-2NT -- and at this point you can bid 3M to accept the invitation and also show the 5-card suit.

[jillybean]

I dont use garbage or play puppet. I used 2♠ as weak take out to a minor, pass or correct. I'll take a look a puppet.

[BillHiggin]

IMHO, the first proposal may be sound, the second represents severe implications for the use of stayman (I would not agree to that).

My approach to 1N with a five card major has always been that once I make the decision to open 1N, I have basically decided to treat the hand as if it does not contain a 5 card major and I remain consistent to that for the balance of the auction. Depending on the rest of the 1N response structure, one could possibly adopt using 3♣ as a form of puppet stayman (certainly, other schemes are also possible).

[Gerben42]

Quote

  In an auction where 1nt opener holds a 5card major and the bidding starts 1N:2N, opener could bid 3♠ saying we have game but I think it might play better in 4♠, I have 5 do you have 3?
The opener may be worried about one of the other suits not being solid, would this be useful or just be giving the opps free information?

Yes, this is useful.

Quote

After 1N:2♣ stayman I’m using 3♠ to show 5 and force game in NT or ♠
I will of course alert all this cool.gif

This is not forcing to game but just showing a maximum. partner with a weak hand and both majors will just pass, of course.

Quote

I dont use garbage or play puppet.

And here's me thinking that Stayman does not promise values and you need a special agreement to say that it does...

[jillybean]

Gerben42, on May 6 2007, 11:34 AM, said:

Quote

I dont use garbage or play puppet.

And here's me thinking that Stayman does not promise values and you need a special agreement to say that it does...

I thought 1nt:2♣ usually shows 8+ and you take a gamble bidding it on less, intending to pass any response. (4441). I dont know how garbage or puppet stayman work.
Or maybe Im wrong and the above comment has a touch of sarcasm?

[Gerben42]

Quote

I thought 1nt:2♣ usually shows 8+ and you take a gamble bidding it on less, intending to pass any response. (4441). I dont know how garbage or puppet stayman work.

Puppet Stayman is not so important, we're talking about normal Stayman. Garbage Stayman does not "work" in a special way. It also doesn't deserve to be called garbage Stayman it is just normal Stayman.

Stayman is an ASKING bid. Opener bids 1NT and at this point his partner is the captain. 2♣ asks: Do you have a 4-card majors. Again opener shows. Responder is The Decider. Opener should not care if partner promises 8 points or 0. He does not decide the course.

My agreements (I fear to stay standard as there are too many)

1N 2♣ 2♦ 2♥: weak both majors

1N 2♣ 2♦ 2♠ and 1N 2♦ 2♥ 2♠ : invite 5-4 majors

BTW a nice trick I want to share. To the 2♥ weak bid it is best to play this as "bid 2♠ unless you have only 2" rather than "pass unless you have only 2 ♥". After 2♠, responder can bid 2NT to play with some hands.

[jillybean]

Ah! garbarge stayman and regular stayman are the same. I had no idea what is was and I can't remember my partner bidding stayman then passing but Im sure it happens.

I do see transfer/pass over 1nt so if you play super accept I assume this has similar drawbacks.

[cherdano]

I would just not worry about showing your 5cd M, unless the auction allows it naturally, as e.g. in 1N 2C 2H 3C 3H.

If both hands are balanced, it is often right to play 3N even if you have a 5-3 major suit fit.

[SoTired]

Garbage Stayman has both a regular and exended version and is a specific auction.

The weak 4441 hand that will pass any 2x Stayman rebid is NOT garbage stayman.

Garbage Stayman is a weak hand with 4-4 in majors or better, with spades equal to or longer than hearts. Responder bids 2C. If opener bids 2D, responder bids 2H (weak, alertable Garbage Stayman) showing 4+♥ and 4+♠. Opener passes with better hearts or corrects to 2S with equal or better spades. Responder with a weak hand and 5♥/4♠ just transfers to hearts and passes. Since the 2C followed by 2H bid normally shows invite values with 5♥/4♠, responder with that hand transfers to hearts and bids 2S. Responder with invite values with 5♠/4♥ bids 2C followed by 2S if opener bids 2D.

There is an extended version of Garbage Stayman used when responder is weak with one 4-card major and 5+card minor. The auction 1N 2C 2D 3m is a weak sign-off. Also, 1N 2C 2H 2S may be weak or invitational with 4s. If weak, will have 5+m. Opener passes with 4♠ and min, 3S with 4♠ and max, 2N with min and <4♠, and 3C with max and <4♠. Extended Garbage Stayman requires several other changes like 4-suit transfers. With a game-force, slam-interest 4M/5m+, responder transfers to the minor and then bids the major. IMHO, this is the weak point of Extended Garbage Stayman because those slams are harder to bid then.

[jillybean]

seems like it can "work" in a special way after all

[Gerben42]

Yes but this is not "standard" (there is that word again...). It is more usual to play a new suit on the 3-level after Stayman as forcing.

[P_Marlowe]

Gerben42, on May 6 2007, 04:37 PM, said:

<snip>
Garbage Stayman does not "work" in a special way. It also doesn't deserve to be called garbage Stayman it is just normal Stayman.

Stayman is an ASKING bid. Opener bids 1NT and at this point his partner is the captain. 2♣ asks: Do you have a 4-card majors. Again opener shows. Responder is The Decider. Opener should not care if partner promises 8 points or 0. He does not decide the course.
<snip>

Hi,

I wont argue, but there is a difference, although
you may say just a minor one.
The difference shows up, if the opponents interfere.
If you play "forcing" Stayman, i.e. the 2C "asking bid"
promises some life, you are better placed than, if
you play garbage stayman.

Just look at the repeatedly asked question, if double
by the stayman bidder is fo takeout or for penalty.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: And of course the meaning of

1NT 2C
2D 2H/2S

is slightly different.

[Wackojack]

The debate so far begs important questions. I see the need to open 1NT with a 5-card major, not because I don't care about 5-3 (or even 5-4) major suit fits. It is because in my system, (Acol, SAYC, 2/1 if I open 1 major and rebid 2 major, I need it to show a 6-card suit, or at least a very good 5. What I have lost by this approach is the possibility of missing a 5-4 or 5-3 fit opposite a weak hand or a 5-3 fit opposite a stronger hand. The questions are:
1. Is this loss greater than the gain of knowing a major suit rebid shows a 6-card suit.
2. It it worth retrieving some of that loss by the use of a 5-card major asking bid?
3. Whatever that particular bid is, what is its price in terms of losses, against the perceived gain of finding a possible 5-3 fit?
4. Can my system rebid no trumps after opening 1 major in all cases, thus obviating the need to open 1NT with a 5-card major.
4. Is there a "cake and eat it" solution where there is no loss?

Perhaps out of all this there is no immediate answer and the best solution(s) will eventually emerge Darwinianly (if I can say that)

[Gerben42]

Quote

Perhaps out of all this there is no immediate answer and the best solution(s) will eventually emerge Darwinianly (if I can say that)

It's not Darwinian since better-scoring methods may not be the ones who gain the most supporters, which is what counts.

[mgoetze]

Gerben42, on May 7 2007, 11:08 AM, said:

It's not Darwinian since better-scoring methods may not be the ones who gain the most supporters, which is what counts.

Indeed, if bridge methods evolved that way, we'd all be playing Meckwell Precision or Fantunes now, wouldn't we?

[Gerben42]

Meckwell precision I don't know, but there exist simple enough Fantunes versions for everyone.

[Wackojack]

Haven't transfers, negative doubles and weak 2's all evolved in Darwinian fashion? There are also Darwinian cul-de-sacs, where island species flourish until they have to compete with neighbouring better equipped mainland species. Is Acol (popular in island Britain) but slowly being abandoned an example of that? Culbertson is extict.

[kenrexford]

I never really saw that much of a problem arising all that frequently.

Nonetheless, I then added in 3♣ as Puppet Stayman, 3♥ as 3145/3154, 3♠ as 1345/1354, and the like. Every so often, this is nice.

The "problem hand" seems to be the 5-card major opposite invitational. This is not such a problem when Opener has a maximum, as he usually, as you noted, can rebid the major in a Stayman auction or may introduce the major at the three-level in a non-Stayman auction that is invitational, if that exists.

So, the problem seems to be restricted to a minimum 1NT opposite an invitational (or weak) responder. That specific pairing is rare, and some pairings end up resolved through Garbage anyway, or opposition competition allowing Opener to pipe up.

The rare occasion where the partnership would be able to declare the major but cannot get there is often mitigated by the defense erring at 1NT or 1NT legitimately making as much.

The extremely rare occasion where we declare 1NT, an inferior contract to the major, just does not seem like grounds to switch system.