[gwnn]

I think she meant "invitational+".

[FrancesHinden]

I did

[mike777]

"He thought that was being a bit exotic".


if 2s is inv+ what does that mean?.....is 2s forcing or not?

I am guessing I cannot pass 2s but....?

ok this sounds exotic and I am confused.

[gwnn]

You can bid it on a 25 count. Do you think that bid is forcing or non forcing?

[helene_t]

I don't see why 2♠ should be forcing if it shows four spades. A GF hand would bid either 3NT or 3m, which does show four spades, regardless of what 2N shows or denies.

OK, a hand that wants to bid a quantitative 4N but with four spades should maybe bid 2♠ first. But it kinda defeats the purpose of playing 2♠ as natural, I think.

A related issue: is
1NT-2♣
2♥-3m*
forcing? Although it is (or at least used to be) nonforcing in (at least) some beginners' textbooks in the Netherlands, I think the standard interpretation is natural GF with four spades. But if one does not play 4-way transfers or something similar, I can imagine using 3m via 2♠ to show such a hand.

Oh well, this is probably academic, in practice players who don't play 4-way or similar won't have such detailed agreements about Stayman.

[ArtK78]

There seems to be some confusion as to a fairly common treatment of the 2♠ rebid being discussed in this thread.

In North America, if a partnership plays that 1NT-2NT is something other than an invitational notrump bid (such as four-suit transfers, where 2NT is a transfer to diamonds), there has to be a substitute for the invitational notrump sequence. The substitute is to bid Stayman first. However, there also has to be a way to distinguish between an invitational hand with 4 spades and one without 4 spades.

So, if the auction begins 1NT - 2♣ - 2♥

Each partner might have 4 spades on this auction. With a game forcing hand, responder bids 3NT. Since he would not have bid Stayman with game forcing values without 4 cards in a major, the 4-4 spade fit will not be lost, as opener will correct to 4♠.

However, if responder has invitational values, he bids 2♠ with 4 spades and 2NT without 4 spades. Opener will either pass 2♠ with a fit and a non-acceptance, correct to 2NT with a minimum and no fit, bid 3NT or bid 3♠ invitational or 4♠ to play; or, if responder bid 2NT, opener will pass or bid 3NT.

This is a common, but not universal, method used when the partnership plays 2NT as something other than a natural and invitational response to 1NT.

[InTime]

ArtK78, on Oct 10 2008, 07:34 AM, said:

There seems to be some confusion as to a fairly common treatment of the 2♠ rebid being discussed in this thread.

In North America, if a partnership plays that 1NT-2NT is something other than an invitational notrump bid (such as four-suit transfers, where 2NT is a transfer to diamonds), there has to be a substitute for the invitational notrump sequence. The substitute is to bid Stayman first. However, there also has to be a way to distinguish between an invitational hand with 4 spades and one without 4 spades.

So, if the auction begins 1NT - 2♣ - 2♥

Each partner might have 4 spades on this auction. With a game forcing hand, responder bids 3NT. Since he would not have bid Stayman with game forcing values without 4 cards in a major, the 4-4 spade fit will not be lost, as opener will correct to 4♠.

However, if responder has invitational values, he bids 2♠ with 4 spades and 2NT without 4 spades. Opener will either pass 2♠ with a fit and a non-acceptance, correct to 2NT with a minimum and no fit, bid 3NT or bid 3♠ invitational or 4♠ to play; or, if responder bid 2NT, opener will pass or bid 3NT.

This is a common, but not universal, method used when the partnership plays 2NT as something other than a natural and invitational response to 1NT.

Thanks. This sums it up nicely. I fully agree with this. Just keep your stayman sequences simple and strait forward.
I must just add:
If responder has slam going values and the other major (in this case 4 spades), he simply bids his best minor on the 3 level. This is 100% forcing and indicates the other major. In this way nothing can be missed.
Again, that is now if your system allows for it.
It seems there is a sort of "Standard" for each country in the world.
It just amazes me how much can be written about this topic.

[FrancesHinden]

Quote

Just keep your stayman sequences simple and strait forward.

I must just add:

If responder has slam going values and the other major (in this case 4 spades), he simply bids his best minor on the 3 level. This is 100% forcing and indicates the other major.

Simple and straightforward? Now we have an almost artificial 3m bid over 2H to indicate a slam try with four spades, how is that simple and straightforward? I would have thought that playing 1NT - 2C - 2H - 2S as natural and forcing is considerably simpler than that.

How lucky I am that I don't actually play Stayman any more...

[jdonn]

FrancesHinden, on Oct 10 2008, 09:04 AM, said:

Quote

Just keep your stayman sequences simple and strait forward.

I must just add:

If responder has slam going values and the other major (in this case 4 spades), he simply bids his best minor on the 3 level. This is 100% forcing and indicates the other major.

Simple and straightforward? Now we have an almost artificial 3m bid over 2H to indicate a slam try with four spades, how is that simple and straightforward?

3m is a NATURAL slam try showing 4 spades, nothing artificial about it. Perhaps Art was unclear since of course on balanced hands with 4 spades you of course bid 4NT (or appropriate NT), not a minor.

[gwnn]

I would like

1NT-2♣
2♥-3m

to show at least 5-4.

[InTime]

helene_t, on Oct 10 2008, 06:34 AM, said:

I don't see why 2♠ should be forcing if it shows four spades. A GF hand would bid either 3NT or 3m, which does show four spades, regardless of what 2N shows or denies.

OK, a hand that wants to bid a quantitative 4N but with four spades should maybe bid 2♠ first. But it kinda defeats the purpose of playing 2♠ as natural, I think.

A related issue: is
1NT-2♣
2♥-3m*
forcing? Although it is (or at least used to be) nonforcing in (at least) some beginners' textbooks in the Netherlands, I think the standard interpretation is natural GF with four spades. But if one does not play 4-way transfers or something similar, I can imagine using 3m via 2♠ to show such a hand.

Oh well, this is probably academic, in practice players who don't play 4-way or similar won't have such detailed agreements about Stayman.

I think the idea is that both majors are treated equal and that the contract will end at maximum 3M without enough values for game.
For example:
1NT - 2♣ - 2♥ - 3♥ - Pass / 3NT or 4♥
1NT - 2♣ - 2♥ - 2♠(forcing) - 2NT / 3♠ / 3NT / 4♠
The reason that 2♠ is considered as forcing is that responder can sit with slam values, is uncertain in what direction he should move and want to hear from partner if he is max/min and does his hand contain 4 spades. It does give him breathing space to consider his next move as long as he knows 2♠ will not be passed. The contract will end at max 3♠ without enough values for game. The same as with ♥'s.
Without the above understanding, responder must probably blast into 4NT uncomfortably.

Therefore I feel strongly that 2♠ is the better bid to make. Even if the stayman sequence guarentees a 4-card major.

With game going values by responder the bidding will be 1NT - 2♣ - 2♥ - 3NT. Responder is sitting with 4 cards in the other major otherwise it did not make sense to have moved via Stayman.

1NT - 2♣ - 2M - 3m
In this instance 3m is NATURAL and forcing and also indicates the other major. Responder is sitting with a 6-4 or 5-4 in a minor/major with slam values and would have started off with 1NT - 3m (slam interest in the minor) not having a 4-card major. Having a 4-card major, he decided to go via stayman first. This bid caters nicely for these types of hands which is sometimes difficult to bid.

I hope my interpretation makes sense.

Also, I am new to this forum and don't know what the word 'Exotic' exactly means in bridge terms. It sounds like meaning 'over elaborating'? I will appreciate if you can inform me if possible.

Regards

[Free]

Isn't the standard these days 1NT-2♣-2♥-2♠ invite with 4♠, while 1NT-2♣-2♦-2♠ is invitational with 5♠ and 4♥?

[InTime]

Free, on Oct 12 2008, 08:36 AM, said:

Isn't the standard these days 1NT-2♣-2♥-2♠ invite with 4♠, while 1NT-2♣-2♦-2♠ is invitational with 5♠ and 4♥?

My attempt was not to put a standard here. I was just trying to explain why certain people probably regards 2♠ as forcing. At the end it is all about partnership agreement. I dont think there is a general standard.

[skjaeran]

Free, on Oct 12 2008, 03:36 PM, said:

Isn't the standard these days 1NT-2♣-2♥-2♠ invite with 4♠, while 1NT-2♣-2♦-2♠ is invitational with 5♠ and 4♥?

I don't think there's a standard at all. Or there might be some places.

For me 2♠ is a GF relay in both sequences, asking for distribution. Many play that over here, but I'd not call it standard by any means.