[sty2000]

Assume playing standard 15-17 no-trump (5-card suit is possible). What are recommended bids (both by opener and his/her partner) after RHO doubles pd's Stayman, assuming that double is lead-directing?

[ONEferBRID]

I prefer "Systems ON" over DBL ( and over 2C interference for that matter ).

[helene_t]

With an unknown p I would assume:
pass=nothing to say
rdbl=lets play 2♣xx
2♦=diamonds, no majors
2♥/♠: normal

Maybe better to play transfers to get any club honor responder might have protected against the lead:
pass: nothing to say. responder can redouble for business, bid 2♦ with invitational and 4+ diamonds, or bid a major when weak with both majors.
rdbl: 5+ diamonds
2♦/♥: transfers.

[hanp]

We play:

pass: no stopper, redouble reasks.
bid: as normal but with stopper.

[gwnn]

phantomsac wrote about this auction but the suit symbols are gone now

http://justinlall.com/2009/03/29/punishing...rtificial-bids/

[jjbrr]

Expert standard, I believe, is redouble shows interest in playing 2♣xx, bids gaurantee a stopper in clubs, and pass denies a stopper.

Over pass, partner either bids his hand or redoubles to re-ask stayman. If partner redoubles, I believe many advocate bidding the major you don't have in an effort to get partner to declare the hand (since you have no stopper).

[debrose]

jjbrr, on Feb 5 2010, 10:17 AM, said:

Expert standard, I believe, is redouble shows interest in playing 2♣xx, bids gaurantee a stopper in clubs, and pass denies a stopper.

Over pass, partner either bids his hand or redoubles to re-ask stayman. If partner redoubles, I believe many advocate bidding the major you don't have in an effort to get partner to declare the hand (since you have no stopper).

Though I now play the above system with one partner, including opener bidding the OTHER major over the re-ask, I would not have thought of it as expert standard. Maybe I'm behind the times.

I've always played that redouble showed a strong desire to play in 2♣XX (5 clubs or 4 great ones), and that pass was a suggestion to play 2♣XX (4 good clubs). Now responder's XX is to play. Other bids by opener are as if no double, and now responder can bid 3♣ to check on a stopper. Until a year ago, I would have thought that was expert Standard.

Perhaps what jjbrr describes is the new Expert Standard, but I certainly wouldn't assume any of it without an agreement. Maybe this way is better - it hasn't come up yet with the one partner I play it with - but I've had good results playing in 2♣XX, and bad results when they've done so against me, so I like the system that caters to getting there more often. People tend make rather unsound doubles of 2♣.

[jjbrr]

debrose, on Feb 5 2010, 10:38 AM, said:

jjbrr, on Feb 5 2010, 10:17 AM, said:

Expert standard, I believe, is redouble shows interest in playing 2♣xx, bids gaurantee a stopper in clubs, and pass denies a stopper.

Over pass, partner either bids his hand or redoubles to re-ask stayman. If partner redoubles, I believe many advocate bidding the major you don't have in an effort to get partner to declare the hand (since you have no stopper).

Though I now play the above system with one partner, including opener bidding the OTHER major over the re-ask, I would not have thought of it as expert standard. Maybe I'm behind the times.

I've always played that redouble showed a strong desire to play in 2♣XX (5 clubs or 4 great ones), and that pass was a suggestion to play 2♣XX (4 good clubs). Now responder's XX is to play. Other bids by opener are as if no double, and now responder can bid 3♣ to check on a stopper. Until a year ago, I would have thought that was expert Standard.

Perhaps what jjbrr describes is the new Expert Standard, but I certainly wouldn't assume any of it without an agreement. Maybe this way is better - it hasn't come up yet with the one partner I play it with - but I've had good results playing in 2♣XX, and bad results when they've done so against me, so I like the system that caters to getting there more often. People tend make rather unsound doubles of 2♣.

You probably know much better than I do what one would consider "expert standard." I've been under the impression that partners and I have been on the same page in this auction, so I interpreted it as "standard," but maybe I've been mistaken.

Your points about people making unsound doubles and 2♣xx being a long-term winner are both very accurate imo.

[karlson]

I like
pass=stopper or wants to play 2cxx opposite any normal stayman. Forces xx unless garbage
xx=cooperative (4 decent clubs)
bid=no stoppper.

This seems more intuitive to me than debbie's structure (what does responder do over the pass if he doesn't want to redouble but wants to know about majors? or does pass deny a major? I'm sure it all works, but you need some extra agreements). Also, I think it's right to switch the pass and bid in jeremy's scheme, since when you don't have a stopper is when they're most likely to bid 3c.

It's probably right to play the major-switching responses over the balancing redouble even in this structure where opener has the stopper since it can still be Qx opposite openers's Axx or Kxx or something of this sort.

Come to think of it, we should just play major-switching responses immediately over the double.

[FrancesHinden]

jjbrr, on Feb 5 2010, 03:17 PM, said:

Expert standard, I believe, is redouble shows interest in playing 2♣xx, bids gaurantee a stopper in clubs, and pass denies a stopper.

Over pass, partner either bids his hand or redoubles to re-ask stayman. If partner redoubles, I believe many advocate bidding the major you don't have in an effort to get partner to declare the hand (since you have no stopper).

This does seem to be completely standard in France and Italy, but virtually unknown in e.g. England, where Debrose's scheme is more common.

If you are going to play that one of pass and bid shows a stopper, it should surely be that pass shows the stopper in case partner wants to play 2Cxx.

[hanp]

If you play that a redouble by responder is a renewed stayman, you can't play 2CXX after a pass. (unless you use the Karlson-switch, which I think works better for playing 2CXX but has the disadvantage that responder cannot bid stayman after opener redoubles.

[karlson]

Sorry, I didn't write it, but I would have xx by opener deny a major. So you don't get to play 2cxx when opener has a major to show.

[Siegmund]

What my reg p and I use is
immediate XX = desire to penalize - at least 4 good clubs with 2 stoppers
pass = moderate holding in clubs
immediate 2D, 2H, 2S = Stayman responses denying a stopper.

If opener passes and it comes back to partner, XX = desire to penalize, 2D = re-ask (opener bids 2NT with no 4CM), higher bids as if the auction had gone 1n-pass-2c-pass-2d-pass.

I can see a good case for swapping the meanings of pass and the immediate bids, and for trying to make responder declarer if opener doesn't have a stopper and responder does.

[helene_t]

karlson, on Feb 5 2010, 09:36 PM, said:

Come to think of it, we should just play major-switching responses immediately over the double.

No because when you bid 2♠ showing hearts responder might have a weak hand wanting to play 2♥.

So play transfers instead.

[fred]

Siegmund, on Feb 5 2010, 09:38 PM, said:

If opener passes and it comes back to partner, XX = desire to penalize, 2D = re-ask (opener bids 2NT with no 4CM),

That doesn't work if you ever bid Stayman with the intention of passing any response (say with a weak 3-suited or semi-3-suited hand short in clubs).

If you do this and, over the DBL of Stayman, opener either Passes or RDBLs, the only thing you can do is bid 2D.

So 2D cannot be a "re-ask" - you need it as a natural bid. If, depending on your other agreements, you still need a re-ask for either a 4-card major or a stopper, you can always use 3C (which is not a useful natural bid) for this purpose.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[Siegmund]

That's true, we lose the ability to stop in 2♦. (We can still rebid 2♥ with the both-majors garbage stayman hands.)

Oddly, I don't remember us ever getting burned this way. But on paper it certainly looks more valuable to have the diamond escape available than to turn a double into a redouble.

[dburn]

If one of your higher priorities is to determine whether to punish the opponents by playing in 2♣ redoubled when advantageous to do so, you might consider:

Pass = either a strong desire to play 2♣ redoubled (5+ clubs) or no desire to play 2♣ redoubled, but no major.

Redouble = a "medium" desire to play 2♣ redoubled (4 good clubs).

2♦ = 5+ diamonds.

2♥ / ♠ = 4+ cards, no desire to play 2♣ redoubled.

After pass, partner redoubles to play facing 5+ clubs (and opener with no desire to play 2♣ redoubled bids 2♦, which will usually be a 4-card suit unless he has four bad clubs).

After redouble, partner passes or does whatever he would have done after a 2♦ response to Stayman (taking care to bid 2♦ and not pass if he would have passed a 2♦ response, bien entendu). Here 3♣ is obviously not natural, and can be used for whatever purpose you like.

The same principle can be used if a transfer is doubled; e.g. after 1NT - 2♦ (Double):

Pass = either 5 diamonds or only two hearts (shown by pulling partner's redouble to 2♥).

Redouble = 4 good diamonds.

2♥ = 3+ hearts, no desire to play 2♦ redoubled.