Stayman doubled
#1
Posted 2010-February-05, 08:54
#2
Posted 2010-February-05, 09:12
#3
Posted 2010-February-05, 09:13
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.
#4
Posted 2010-February-05, 09:14
pass: no stopper, redouble reasks.
bid: as normal but with stopper.
#5
Posted 2010-February-05, 09:14
http://justinlall.com/2009/03/29/punishing...rtificial-bids/
George Carlin
#6
Posted 2010-February-05, 09:17
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).
bed
#7
Posted 2010-February-05, 09:38
jjbrr, on Feb 5 2010, 10:17 AM, said:
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♣.
#8
Posted 2010-February-05, 09:51
debrose, on Feb 5 2010, 10:38 AM, said:
jjbrr, on Feb 5 2010, 10:17 AM, said:
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.
bed
#9
Posted 2010-February-05, 14:36
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.
#10
Posted 2010-February-05, 14:52
jjbrr, on Feb 5 2010, 03:17 PM, said:
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.
#11
Posted 2010-February-05, 14:56
#12
Posted 2010-February-05, 15:09
#13
Posted 2010-February-05, 15:38
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.
#14
Posted 2010-February-05, 16:31
karlson, on Feb 5 2010, 09:36 PM, said:
No because when you bid 2♠ showing hearts responder might have a weak hand wanting to play 2♥.
So play transfers instead.
#15
Posted 2010-February-05, 16:49
Siegmund, on Feb 5 2010, 09:38 PM, said:
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
#16
Posted 2010-February-05, 17:02
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.
#17
Posted 2010-February-05, 20:15
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.
And sealed the Law by vote,
It little matters what they thought -
We hang for what they wrote.