[LoneMonad]

2NT(20-21) pass 3♥ pass
3♠ pass ?
what do the following mean after this sequence:
3NT =
4♣ =
4♦ =
4♥ =
4♠ =
4NT =

also what is a good reference for the structure after 2NT

[awm]

The standard agreements would be:

3NT = choice of games; 5♠ and something like 4-10 points.
4♣, 4♦ = Natural and at least mild slam interest, 5♠ and 4+ in the minor.
4♥ = Natural and at least 5-5 (5-4 bids stayman), choice of games.
4♠ = 6+♠. If a direct 4♥ would be a texas transfer, then this is mild slam interest (but NF).
4NT = quantitative with 5♠ and a balanced hand around 11 hcp; opener can pass or bid on.

To bid keycard in spades, start with 4♥ (transfer) and then 4NT.

Some partnerships assign an alternative meaning to 3♥...4♥ since hands with both majors can bid stayman and smolen, or can bid 3♦..3♠. The most likely meaning would be "artificial slam try in spades." But standard is still natural here.

[Jlall]

Yep what Adam said.

[aguahombre]

yep....the thing with a lot of inexperienced players is that they think about 4C is gerber and 4NT is blackwood. but that just screws up the structure Adam showed.

If a non jump in these situations can be natural, it is natural. and NT should always be natural when NT has been opened.

P.s. what is a good reference? Adam's reply

[nigel_k]

I also agree with Adam's suggestion.

But responder has a problem on 5332 hands with slam interest. 4NT invitational is ok though a bit preemptive but you also have stronger hands where 6NT or 7♠ is possible but the possible spade fit is still not known. I would either try to fit these into the 4♣/♦ bids or agree to normally superaccept with three card support unless 4333 or very unsuitable.

[aguahombre]

nigel_k, on Nov 9 2009, 01:06 PM, said:

but you also have stronger hands where 6NT or 7♠ is possible but the possible spade fit is still not known.

2NT-3H
3S -6NT (choice of slams)

This style might have some flaws.

[Fluffy]

This is not so popular, but I play GF transfers, partner completes with 3+ cards and bids 3♠/NT with 2. Helps a lot towards slam bidding at the cost of some partscores.

[kenrexford]

Fluffy, on Nov 9 2009, 03:30 PM, said:

This is not so popular, but I play GF transfers, partner completes with 3+ cards and bids 3♠/NT with 2. Helps a lot towards slam bidding at the cost of some partscores.

I think this makes a heck of a lot of sense, personally. It is extremely rare to actually end up in three of a major anyway. I can't remember when it happened last, if ever. I recall a hand somewhat recently where we would have ended in 3M had I not super-accepted (we made 5).

[Mbodell]

kenrexford, on Nov 9 2009, 02:30 PM, said:

I recall a hand somewhat recently where we would have ended in 3M had I not super-accepted (we made 5).

This brings up for me the question of super accepts over transfers after 2nt. What should they show/mean?

I pulled the following (undiscussed) on my newer partnership this weekend 2nt - 3♦ - 4♣ and partner wasn't sure what I was showing (and neither was I). Partner punted 6nt which made, but what would you expect the opening bidder to have for 2nt ... 4♣?

[aguahombre]

A strange 2NT with a lot of club tricks and 3 of the major?

[Free]

Fluffy, on Nov 9 2009, 09:30 PM, said:

This is not so popular, but I play GF transfers, partner completes with 3+ cards and bids 3♠/NT with 2. Helps a lot towards slam bidding at the cost of some partscores.

I play the other way around:
- accepting the transfer denies fit
- step 1 shows 3-card fit (2NT-3D-3S-3NT = S cue)
- other bids are 4-card fit and cue (2NT-3D-3NT = S cue)

Knowing about a 3 or 4-card fit is very valuable imo. And we have all cuebids available after super accepts, because we replace 3NT with a lost cuebid.

[Fluffy]

by doing that Frederick you get the chance to play bad 5-2 partscores in the right hand, and lose the ability to play games on the correct hand. It is also playable, but my dad insists so much on the right hand playing the contract.

We play weird things after a 1NT opening (either us or opponents) to make the right hand declarer.

EDIT: You also get the right hand to play 6-2 games, I see

[lowerline]

I like the Kleinman structure for super accepts. Over 3♥:

3♠ = 2♠ (or 3♠ with an absolute minimum)
3NT = 3♠5♥ --> 4♦/♥ transfers
4m = 3♠4+m --> 4♥ transfer
4♥ = 4♠ and suitable for dummy play ("aces & spaces")
4♠ = 4♠

Steven

[Phil]

aguahombre, on Nov 9 2009, 03:15 PM, said:

nigel_k, on Nov 9 2009, 01:06 PM, said:

but you also have stronger hands where 6NT or 7♠ is possible but the possible spade fit is still not known.

2NT-3H
3S -6NT (choice of slams)

This style might have some flaws.

Not if you use 5N as the choice of slams between 6♠ and 6N (or maybe 6 of something else since responder is usually 5(332).

There are some troglodytes that us 5N as a grand try, but they are slowly dying off.

[kenrexford]

Mbodell, on Nov 9 2009, 11:32 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Nov 9 2009, 02:30 PM, said:

I recall a hand somewhat recently where we would have ended in 3M had I not super-accepted (we made 5).

This brings up for me the question of super accepts over transfers after 2nt. What should they show/mean?

I pulled the following (undiscussed) on my newer partnership this weekend 2nt - 3♦ - 4♣ and partner wasn't sure what I was showing (and neither was I). Partner punted 6nt which made, but what would you expect the opening bidder to have for 2nt ... 4♣?

I like to cuebid the cheapest suit in which I have two of the top three honors as my super-acceptance, with 3NT replacing the cuebid that would be one below trumps. Responder can then re-transfer.

[aguahombre]

Phil, on Nov 10 2009, 03:49 AM, said:

aguahombre, on Nov 9 2009, 03:15 PM, said:

nigel_k, on Nov 9 2009, 01:06 PM, said:

but you also have stronger hands where 6NT or 7♠ is possible but the possible spade fit is still not known.

2NT-3H
3S -6NT (choice of slams)

This style might have some flaws.

Not if you use 5N as the choice of slams between 6♠ and 6N (or maybe 6 of something else since responder is usually 5(332).

There are some troglodytes that us 5N as a grand try, but they are slowly dying off.

I am one of those trog things. 5Nt grand try, but not after xfer, where it becomes choice of slams. The extension to 6NT after xfer is really used?

[Free]

Fluffy, on Nov 10 2009, 10:19 AM, said:

by doing that Frederick you get the chance to play bad 5-2 partscores in the right hand, and lose the ability to play games on the correct hand. It is also playable, but my dad insists so much on the right hand playing the contract.

We play weird things after a 1NT opening (either us or opponents) to make the right hand declarer.

EDIT: You also get the right hand to play 6-2 games, I see

You would be right if nobody ever thought of using retransfers when opener shows fit

[nigel_k]

I think the first step (accepting the transfer) with a doubleton has definite advantages.

The most important is that hands with three card support can go past 3NT and hands with a doubleton cannot. So you have more space available if you bypass the first step with support. Plus I like to use 2NT-3♥-3NT to show two spades and five hearts. With spade support I am always bidding at the four level on that sequence which is fine as we have an eight card fit. If you bid 3♠ with three card support and 3NT with a doubleton then obviously you can't show the hand with five hearts.

Similarly after 2NT-3D:
3♥ with a doubleton heart or 4333
3♠ with five spades
3NT/4♣/4♦/4♥ with heart support

What you actually do when showing support is a separate question. Undiscussed I think the default would be a cue bid but there is some merit in just using the first available step (2NT-3♦-3NT or 2NT-3♥-4♣) on most hands because it allows for a re-transfer plus another step for responder to show slam interest below game and it doesn't impart any information to defenders when responder only wanted to play game anyway which is most of the time.

[Mbodell]

kenrexford, on Nov 10 2009, 05:06 AM, said:

Mbodell, on Nov 9 2009, 11:32 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Nov 9 2009, 02:30 PM, said:

I recall a hand somewhat recently where we would have ended in 3M had I not super-accepted (we made 5).

This brings up for me the question of super accepts over transfers after 2nt. What should they show/mean?

I pulled the following (undiscussed) on my newer partnership this weekend 2nt - 3♦ - 4♣ and partner wasn't sure what I was showing (and neither was I). Partner punted 6nt which made, but what would you expect the opening bidder to have for 2nt ... 4♣?

I like to cuebid the cheapest suit in which I have two of the top three honors as my super-acceptance, with 3NT replacing the cuebid that would be one below trumps. Responder can then re-transfer.

Yeah, I thought it was a cue bid (first or second). But my pro LHO said that it is best as a second suit (good 4 or 5), but I wasn't sure if that was best and expert standard undiscussed, or just his opinion on best. Fortunately my hand sort of fit all of these meanings as I was Qx AKxx AKx KQxx so I'm a max with great hearts, a side club suit that has 2 of the top 3 honors, and I'm skipping spades which hopefully points out my weakness there. Partner flopped Kxx QJTxx Qxx Ax which let me claim 6 on the opening lead (although we lost an IMP on the board, so I probably should have tried to sneak a spade to the Q by and then play for the black suit squeeze).

[kenrexford]

Mbodell, on Nov 10 2009, 03:51 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Nov 10 2009, 05:06 AM, said:

Mbodell, on Nov 9 2009, 11:32 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Nov 9 2009, 02:30 PM, said:

I recall a hand somewhat recently where we would have ended in 3M had I not super-accepted (we made 5).

This brings up for me the question of super accepts over transfers after 2nt. What should they show/mean?

I pulled the following (undiscussed) on my newer partnership this weekend 2nt - 3♦ - 4♣ and partner wasn't sure what I was showing (and neither was I). Partner punted 6nt which made, but what would you expect the opening bidder to have for 2nt ... 4♣?

I like to cuebid the cheapest suit in which I have two of the top three honors as my super-acceptance, with 3NT replacing the cuebid that would be one below trumps. Responder can then re-transfer.

Yeah, I thought it was a cue bid (first or second). But my pro LHO said that it is best as a second suit (good 4 or 5), but I wasn't sure if that was best and expert standard undiscussed, or just his opinion on best. Fortunately my hand sort of fit all of these meanings as I was Qx AKxx AKx KQxx so I'm a max with great hearts, a side club suit that has 2 of the top 3 honors, and I'm skipping spades which hopefully points out my weakness there. Partner flopped Kxx QJTxx Qxx Ax which let me claim 6 on the opening lead (although we lost an IMP on the board, so I probably should have tried to sneak a spade to the Q by and then play for the black suit squeeze).

I think there's some merit to a blended approach, if you want to get all sexy and stuff. Something like...

2NT-P-3♥-P-?

3NT = I have a trick source; 4♣ where?; 4♦ = diamonds, 4♥ = hearts, 4♠ = hearts
4♣ = cue
4♦ = cue
4♠ = heart cue

2NT-P-3♦-P-?
3♠ = I have a trick source; 3NT where?; bid suit or 4♥ for spades
3NT = spade cue
4♣ = club cue
4♥ = diamond cue

You could even have a one-under (no re-transfer possible) show something specific where a re-transfer loss is less problematic than inability to show this specific hand.