[Chamaco]

Hi all!

Playing MINI NT (10-12),

1) what scheme do you think is best to handle the following responder's hands ?

- slammish one suiters
- invitational one suiters
- slammish 2 suiters
- invitational two suiters
- weak 2 suiters.
- (As we are about that, also GF 1/2 suiters could be discussed... )

If the answer may be too long here, any pointer to the right sources to study will be greatly appreciated

2) Some sources suggest playing 2-way stayman, and the advantages seem quite clear.
Yet, playing miniNT, I like safety, and giving up the weak 2D signoff worries me a bit.
I would appreciate opinion on this by all people who have experienced miniNT.

3) I am having a little debate with one of my partners who would like to keep transfers on also over miniNT. This is related to point 1) above, as he argues that weak and strong 2-suiters by responder are easier to describe.
All the sources I am studying recommend against that, what is your comment ?

Thanks all!!!

[luke warm]

truscott 2D game force and non-forcing 2C stayman... can still play 2D, but opener will bid a 5M or 6m if he has it... if not, 2D which you can pass

i hate xfers over mini and can barely stand them over weak (12-14)... as a matter of fact, 2 way stayman might be better over any range... i have a little on my webpage, i'll post the link and you can add a couple of example hands so i can illustrate the sequences, if you want

http://www.geocities...uncharm/nt.html

[Rado]

Hi all,
Just an idea:
2♣ - Stayman
2♦ - weak with ♥ or strong with ♦
2♥ - weak with♠ or strong with ♥
..... etc.

Regards
Rado

[Free]

I don't play mini but weak (11-14 usually, or 10-13 in 3rd & 4th), and i'm used to play 4 suit transfers and some sort of extended stayman (garbage included). I don't feel the need in signoff in ♦, and if opps will intervene, thèn we càn sign-off in 2♦ (and 2♣ after Dbl) anyway. NV going down in 1NT won't be a bad score usually. Showing slamish 2-suiters can be done by transfer, or without a Major through an adjusted 2♠ (= trf ♣ or GF 55+m). If we feel like it, we can ask precise shape (also 6 card m or 5422's) followed by low-level RKC and CAB's, so there's not always need to SHOW, and we can always ASK - might give some problems in placing specific top honours quickly...

[whereagles]

I bought this book by Ron Klinger about improved methods after 1NT. Maybe you want to try his "Keri over 1NT" scheme.

Book's called "Bid better, much better after 1NT". It's out of stock, but I managed to get one from a second-hand shop. Definitely worth the bucks I payed.

[1eyedjack]

I don't find the range of the opening 1NT to be particularly relevant to the scheme of responses. Certainly it is relevant to those who believe that placing the declaration in opener's hand is a primary or even signficant purpose of transfers. I do not believe that, but neither do I (prefer to) play transfers opposite any 1N opener.

The range of opener does make potentially a big difference to the responses by a passed hand responder, but I guess that is not what we are talking about here.

[luke warm]

yeah what he said

[pclayton]

Chamaco, on Jul 17 2004, 09:38 AM, said:

Hi all!

Playing MINI NT (10-12),

1) what scheme do you think is best to handle the following responder's hands ?

- slammish one suiters
- invitational one suiters
- slammish 2 suiters
- invitational two suiters
- weak 2 suiters.
- (As we are about that, also GF 1/2 suiters could be discussed... )

If the answer may be too long here, any pointer to the right sources to study will be greatly appreciated

2) Some sources suggest playing 2-way stayman, and the advantages seem quite clear.
Yet, playing miniNT, I like safety, and giving up the weak 2D signoff worries me a bit.
I would appreciate opinion on this by all people who have experienced miniNT.

3) I am having a little debate with one of my partners who would like to keep transfers on also over miniNT. This is related to point 1) above, as he argues that weak and strong 2-suiters by responder are easier to describe.
All the sources I am studying recommend against that, what is your comment ?

Thanks all!!! 

I am a Keri convert.

1. In order:

A. Keri has a cool low-level key card ask with real good suits: 2♠ forces 2N (initially a quantitative range ask), but then a pull to a suit is RKCB in that suit. Otherwise, the auctions get a little bulky, having to go through 1N-2♣-2♦-2N-3x to show the suit.

B. For the minors start with 2♣, then 3 of a minor after the forced 2♦. For the majors, just jump to 3 of the major initially.

C. For a 5-4 (Jacoby), start with a transfer, then 2N shows a 5-4. Responses get complicated from there. For a 5-5, just transfer and bid the second suit.

D. Keri isn't as well equipped here, but you do get the option of playing the major at the 2 level.

E. Just transfer. Sometimes the opponents balance and give you the chance to show your second suit

F. (Not mentioned) - Keri has a great splinter structure with 3♣ through 3♠ that allows you to show 5440's and 4441's with a lot of efficiency.

2. In my other partnership we limp along with 2-way stayman, but we reverse the 2♥ and 2♠ responses allowing responder to initiate a control ask a la Precision.

Obviously with Keri getting out in 2♦ isn't a problem. Here's another scheme I used to play. Its a version of what the Italians used to call "Gladiator":

2♣ - Transfer to 2♦. Signoff in any suit, or quant 2N raise.
2♦ - Non-forcing Stayman
2♥ / 2♠ = At least 5 in suit. Opener responds Ogust style.

3. Using a transfer response to a mini-NT isn't a big deal. While you occasionally wrong side the contract, sometimes you actually right-side it; the Q's and J's in the weak hand end up getting led up to. The extra flexibility in describing the varying hands is worth it.

[MickyB]

I'm also a Keri convert. A couple of comments:

A: Yes, 2♠ is a range enquiry. Then 2N = min, 3♣ = max. Responder has to bid 4♣ with a club single suited slam-try.

B: 1NT:3M = splinter in the suit above, as you say later. I think the invite with a 6 card major is just the normal transfer sequence.

C. Transfer then 2NT shows 5+major, =4 cards in a minor. With both majors, you transfer then bid the other at the 3 level.

The big advantage of Keri, IMO, is being able to invite and still play in 2♥ or 2♠ in a 4-4 or 4-3. If you like opening 1NT enough to play a mini then I think you should like it enough to add a point to the range and play 9-12 or 10-13, in which case invites are much more important.

[luke warm]

can you two post a hand or two that shows how the keri responses would work? i'd like to compare them to the way i'd bid them... thanks

[Fluffy]

I don´t liek any form of weak NT, but I have to love the 2♦ GF relay of the viking club.

after 2 ♦, partner responses shwo his distribution, and responder always bids the next voice wich is a further ask about distribution, when distribution is known it asks for Aces, then Kings.....

[Cascade]

MickyB, on Jul 20 2004, 11:45 AM, said:

B: 1NT:3M = splinter in the suit above, as you say later. I think the invite with a 6 card major is just the normal transfer sequence.

I have been playing my own version of splinters over 1NT. I too bid a suit that I have which I think is much better than actually bidding the singleton. Here is my scheme:

1NT 3x = GF, four or more cards in the suit bid, singleton or void in the other suit of the same rank and at least one four-card major.

These bids never have a five-card major - we transfer and bid our suits with those hands. They can be two or three suited.

Specifically:

1NT 3♣ = GF 4+♣s, 0-1 ♦, 4♥s and or 4♠s

1NT 3♦ = GF 4+♦s, 0-1 ♣, 4♥s and or 4♠s

1NT 3♥ = GF 4♥s, 0-1 ♠

1NT 3♠ = GF 4♠s, 0-1 ♥

One of the advantages of bidding this way is that you can always "cue-bid" the short suit on the way to game to show a good hand.

1NT 3♠
4♥ = good raise of spades

Our definition of "good" here is any hand with a working minimum. So ♠ Axxx ♥ xxx ♦ KQxx ♣ Kx would be a good raise (in our weak NT 11-14 environment).

Similarly over a minor:

1NT 3♣
3♦ this denies a four-card major and shows a good raise of clubs using the same criteria as above.

Similarly after exploration for a fit from either side of the table:

1NT 3♦
3♥ 4♣ = good raise of hearts

1NT 3♦
3♥ 3♠
4♣ = good raise of spades

These bids have served us well although they are not that frequent.

[whereagles]

Fluffy, on Jul 20 2004, 02:08 AM, said:

I don´t liek any form of weak NT, but I have to love the 2♦ GF relay of the viking club.

after 2 ♦, partner responses shwo his distribution, and responder always bids the next voice wich is a further ask about distribution, when distribution is known it asks for Aces, then Kings.....

I used to play this. It's quite ok, but has a problem: the denial cuebids usually start after 3NT, so you don't get to know opposite what honors your short suit is until it's too late. In other words, it's hard to find out how well the hands fit together before 3NT.

If responder has a strong hand which can more or less cope with everything, the relay structure is superior. But on borderline cases, judgement works better than science and that is why I prefer Keri.

[luke warm]

would someone *please* post a hand that shows this bidding? the denial cuebids i use start after 3nt also, but not until the complete dist is known (and this occurs before 3nt)

[Cascade]

Usually the next relay after the distribution is known asks for controls of some sort - either standard A=2 K=1 or AKQ A=3 K=2 Q=3 are common.

Then after that the next relay asks for denial cue-bids usually going through the suits in order of length.

I don't know the Viking club relay but here is one that I play

1NT 2♣
2♦* 2♥ * no major
3♣* 3♦ * 3352
3♥* 3♠ * 2 controls A=2 K=1
3NT* 4♣ * no honour in diamonds etc

[luke warm]

with me it's 2D that starts the relays, not 2C (which is invitational puppet else garbage stayman)

1nt : 2d
2h : 2s - 2h=4 spades, maybe 4 hearts, 2s=relay
2nt : 3c - 2nt=4/4 majors, 3c=relay
3h : 3s - 3h=4432, 3s=min/max ask
then comes control ask, then spiral scan... at any point responder could place the contract

[Fluffy]

whereagles, on Jul 21 2004, 09:24 AM, said:

Fluffy, on Jul 20 2004, 02:08 AM, said:

I don´t liek any form of weak NT, but I have to love the 2♦ GF relay of the viking club.

after 2 ♦, partner responses shwo his distribution, and responder always bids the next voice wich is a further ask about distribution, when distribution is known it asks for Aces, then Kings.....

I used to play this. It's quite ok, but has a problem: the denial cuebids usually start after 3NT, so you don't get to know opposite what honors your short suit is until it's too late. In other words, it's hard to find out how well the hands fit together before 3NT.

If responder has a strong hand which can more or less cope with everything, the relay structure is superior. But on borderline cases, judgement works better than science and that is why I prefer Keri.

I know this is not a great improvement, but stillyou are able to switch to natural whenever you want to, ,that can help on some circumstances (a few).