[awm]

You agree to play XYZ with an expert partner, without a lot of discussion. How would you interpret responder's hand in this auction:

1♥ - 1♠
1N - 2♣
2♦ - 3♦

[pclayton]

We play all hands with 5♠ start with 2♠ after 2♣. This sequence would imply a 4-5 or a 4-6.

On a side note, Adam, I know you raise with 3 almost all of the time, so maybe it makes sense for some of your major suit invitations after 2♣ such as:

1♣ - 1♠
1N - 2♣
2♦ - 2♠

to show 6, not 5.

[mike777]

I prefer that 2d response is not 100% forced to 2c. I respond 2s with 3s first.

[jdonn]

mike777, on Jan 5 2008, 02:46 PM, said:

I prefer that 2d response is not 100% forced to 2c. I respond 2s with 3s first.

I'm confused, are we discussing what 3♦ means (I vote 5-5) or what 2♦ means?

[mike777]

jdonn, on Jan 5 2008, 02:51 PM, said:

mike777, on Jan 5 2008, 02:46 PM, said:

I prefer that 2d response is not 100% forced to 2c.  I  respond 2s with 3s first.

I'm confused, are we discussing what 3♦ means (I vote 5-5) or what 2♦ means?

I thought we first need to agree what 2d means before what 3d means.

[awm]

While obviously you can agree whatever you want, I'm pretty sure that in "normal" XYZ methods, the 2♣ bid is a puppet to 2♦ which opener is always supposed to accept after having made a 1NT rebid. The question is about the 3♦ bid, most particularly how many spades it promises.

[mike777]

awm, on Jan 5 2008, 03:03 PM, said:

While obviously you can agree whatever you want, I'm pretty sure that in "normal" XYZ methods, the 2♣ bid is a puppet to 2♦ which opener is always supposed to accept after having made a 1NT rebid. The question is about the 3♦ bid, most particularly how many spades it promises.

If you are pretty sure that is normal practice ok.....but I did not know that is it that widely agreed but ok. As I said I thought xyz was still in expert flux on that issue.

Hence I posted.

[Trinidad]

I am not claiming to be an expert on xyz. (I play a variation of it with my favorite partner with whom I unfortunately play very infrequently.) If you want to have the expert advice on xy-NT and xyz, go to Denmark (or other Scandinavian countries). But I have the right to Freedom of Speech, so here is my opinion on the matter.

Xyz gives you two ways to bid 3♦. You can bid 3♦ directly after 1NT, or you can first relay with 2♣-2♦ and then bid 3♦. The difference is in the tempo of the auction (invitational, or sign off) or in the distribution of the cards between the suits.

Since it doesn't make sense to play either 3♦ bid as a sign off (just pass 2♣-♦ or bid 2♠ immediately over 1NT), it is clear that the difference between the direct 3♦ bid and the relay 3♦ bid is in the relative length of the spade and diamond suits.

Thus, the idea behind both 3♦ bids is:
- It is invitational.
- Since it can be passed and is a bid at the three level, it shows a -more or less- guaranteed fit. (The more or less is for the 5422 hands that could be treated as balanced. That is unlikely on an auction starting with 1♥-1♠, but it could happen on an action starting with 1♣-1♠.)

Then, the rule is that auctions that go through the relay show extra length in responder's major.

Thus, relaying and bidding 3♦ shows at least 5♠ and at least 5♦ (and invitational values).

====================================

The situation would be more complicated if the final bid would have been 3♣. In that case one could give the bid a meaning equivalent to the 3♦ situation. I have seen people play this.

However, there is no possibility to sign off in clubs over 1NT other than to bid an immediate 3♣. Therefore, it is also possible to use the difference between direct bid and relay first to discriminate between sign offs and invitational hands. This means that the relay followed by 3♣ shows an invitational hand with 4(+)♠ + 6(+)♣. I have seen people play this as well.

Rik

[cjames]

I think X-Y-Z is the sequence 1x-1y-1z where

1Z is a suit, then 2 ♣becomes puppet to 2♦ and 2♦ becomes GF, f.ex:

1♦-1♥
1♠-2♦ (GF)

While the sequence that is posted is x-y NT, though it works the same.
1x-1y
1NT- 2♣ is puppet to 2♦ either to play 2♦ or to come back with an invite.
2♦ is any GF.
2NT is transfer to 3♣

So f.ex :
1♦-1♠
1NT-2♣
2♦-2NT would be invitational with bal hand.


I don't quite know what the sequence you posted means, but could it be something like invite with 5♠ and 4♦? Would think a bal hand with 4♠ and 4♦ would invite via 2NT.

[bhall]

If you do not routinely rebid 1N with a stiff ♠, then it is sensible to stay at the two level when holding 5♠. Consequently, this sequence should be used to show 4♠ and 5+♦, pointing toward 3N as the most likely game, with 4♠ (on a 4-3 fit) running a close second. But every partnership has to make its own choices.

IMHO, if you do routinely rebid 1N on x KQxxx Axx Qxxx and the like, you are probably doomed anyway. But then playing the sequence as 4+♠ and 5+♦ would make sense, and playing 1♥-1♠-1N-2♣-2♦-2♠ as 6+♠ might be best.

[matmat]

I think the hand ought to have at least 5 diamonds. presumably opener would have found a 2d rebid with 54 in the reds, so responder should be bidding on the assumption that declarer has denied 4. i think whether it is 5-5+ or 4-6 should depend on agreements. i'd probably take it to be 4-6)

[cjames]

And I agree with the others that the sequence 1x-1M-1NT-2♣-2♦-2M should tend to be 6+ if you normally raise the major with three card support.

[cjames]

matmat, on Jan 5 2008, 03:23 PM, said:

I think the hand ought to have at least 5 diamonds. presumably opener would have found a 2d rebid with 54 in the reds, so responder should be bidding on the assumption that declarer has denied 4. i think whether it is 5-5+ or 4-6 should depend on agreements. i'd probably take it to be 4-6)

Good point Mat, this is probably better.

[awm]

I suspect that most of the times you see the auction 1♥-1♠-1NT-2♣-2♦-2♠-Pass, opener in fact has exactly two spades. While it's certainly possible to pass here with three spades, a lot of the three-spade hands are probably worth a re-invite of 3♠ in case partner has a sixth spade or a shapely hand that upgrades to a game bid on the eight-card fit.

So it seems like a major benefit of this sequence is that you can play 2♠ instead of 2NT when you have a 5-2 spade fit and non-game values.

Even if you would almost always raise with three spades and almost always rebid 1NT with 15(34) patterns, it's still quite a bit more likely that the 1NT rebid contains two spades rather than one. So assuming that we still believe that 2♠ on a 5-2 will often be a better partial than 2NT, it still seems right to let the puppet sequence show five spades rather than six.

[BillHiggin]

I will vote for the Ambra definition - 5♠-5♦

A jump to 3♦ without going thru the 2♣ relay is used for 4♠-6♦ invitational. A fairly simple rule is "always go thru xyz with exactly 5 cards in first suit". There is no actual standard here - some play the non xyz jump as game forcing 5-5 and some reverse the meanings that I mentioned.

The nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from!

[jdonn]

If it shows potentially as short as 4-5 then what is 3523 opener to do? 4-6 is possible at least.

[cherdano]

We had this discussion before. The solution Han and me agreed to is that opener breaks the 2♣ puppet with a minimum and 3 spades. Then there is no harm in the given sequence being ambiguous, either 4/5+ or 5/5+. (In terms of deciding whether it is a minimum, opener should think of the value of the hand opposite 4 spades only, as with longer spades responder can reinvite.)

I would like to add that in our style this sequence is quite different to 1D 1H 1S etc as opener is more likely to have a minimum with 3-card support after the 1N rebid.

[mike777]

cherdano, on Jan 5 2008, 08:05 PM, said:

We had this discussion before. The solution Han and me agreed to is that opener breaks the 2♣ puppet with a minimum and 3 spades. Then there is no harm in the given sequence being ambiguous, either 4/5+ or 5/5+. (In terms of deciding whether it is a minimum, opener should think of the value of the hand opposite 4 spades only, as with longer spades responder can reinvite.)

I would like to add that in our style this sequence is quite different to 1D 1H 1S etc as opener is more likely to have a minimum with 3-card support after the 1N rebid.

hmmm

This sounds like 2c to 2d as 100% puppet is still in flux in the expert community.

[Free]

It's invitational, and it denies 5 or more ♠s. So what's left? 4♠ and 5+♦...