[mgoetze]

bluecalm, on Sep 5 2010, 06:59 PM, said:

Quote

3NT, WTP?

Imo this awful. They auto lead majors after 1nt - 3nt and if hearts are running they will lead them in 90+% of cases.
I would rather give up stayman than bid 3nt with this hand.

I'm not disagreeing with the 3♥/3♠ convention, I play it myself. But what's the win to using it on this hand? You want partner to give up 3NT when he's weak in hearts... OK great. Then what? Play 5♦ in a 4-3 fit on a combined 26 HCP?

Add another king and we can talk. But if 5m rates to be just as bad as 3NT, then there is no reason to tell opps how to play the hand.

[fuburules3]

I've never played these bids of three of a major showing shortness (or a fragment), but am intrigued. In the past I've used these bids as 5/5 in majors invitational and 5/5 in majors gf. How do you show these hands if you play 3 of a majors shows shortness?

I usually play forcing smolen and reserve transfer to hearts followed by 2 spades as a relay to show a slam try and long suit.

[the hog]

This is one time when I agree with Calm. We used to play Keri where 3C/D/H/S were all bids showing shortness with various s/ts or voids. The object is not to bid perfect slams but rather to avoid poor 3NT contracts. I agree that
Axx
x
KQxxx
QTxx'
is a s/t showing bid, and definitely not a 3NT what's the problem?

[bluecalm]

Quote

I'm not disagreeing with the 3♥/3♠ convention, I play it myself. But what's the win to using it on this hand?

-partner often has 4 card minor fit
-if he doesn't you can still play in 5-3 minor if you have intelligent follow ups (3M is forcing to game so you can't play in 4m)
-sometimes you get to play in spades 4-3 which may be decent contract; partner is welcome to bid 3♠ after 3♥ as natural.

Quote

How do you show these hands if you play 3 of a majors shows shortness?

There are many ways. Two of them are:

1)Use smolen, so:

2♣ - 2♦
3♥/3♠ shows 5-4 hands in majors gf

2♣ - 2♦
2♥ shows weak hand with both majors

2♣ - 2♥
2♠ - 3♥ shows gf hand with 5-5 majors (this is important because you want to be able to stop in 3NT opposite 2-2-(4-5)

Now there is invite missing. You have an option to not play invites with 5-4 majors or:

2♣ - 2♦
2♠ = invite with 5spades/4hearts

2♦ - 2♥
2♠= invite with 5hearts/4spades

This is close because there are other useful things you can do with two last sequences and invites with 5-4 are rare. Your choice.

2)use ask about 3card majors, then:

1NT - 2♣
2♦ - 3♦ = ask about 3 card major

You can show 3's naturally, bid 3NT with 2-2-(4-5) or 2-2-(3-6). With 3-3 majors you can either show hearts first or agree that bids above 3NT shows 3-3 majors and good/average/bad hand (4♣/4♦/4♥).

This has the advantage because you can use:

1NT - 2♣
2♦ - 3♥/3♠ as showing shortness ( (4-1)-3-5)/(4-1)-4-4) hands which is agani very useful.

If you play that way you need to play:

1NT - 2♣
2♦ - 3♣

as artificial ask, like in this thread: http://forums.bridge...showtopic=41385 (see Mohitz's scheme)


I may also add as we are at it that after suit response to stayman:

1NT - 2♣
2♥/2♠

It's useful to play that other major (2♠/3♥) sets opener's major as trumps so you can explore slams/best game.

If you play this or you play like Gwnn's wrote (that stayman can be bid without 4M) then it's useful to play more responses to stayman:

1NT - 2♣
2NT/3♣ = 4-4 majors, min/max (then you use 3♦/3♥ as transfers and bid slam tries/games).
The reason for this is that you free other sequences which normally are used to show hands with other major (like 1NT - 2♣ - 2♥ - 2♠).

This is all quite complicated as gor B/I's so I think OP should settle for his own system for now. Just add the most important followups an 3M bids as showing shortness because those are really useful and quite frequent.

[Cyberyeti]

The_Hog, on Sep 6 2010, 12:55 AM, said:

This is one time when I agree with Calm. We used to play Keri where 3C/D/H/S were all bids showing shortness with various s/ts or voids. The object is not to bid perfect slams but rather to avoid poor 3NT contracts. I agree that
Axx
x
KQxxx
QTxx'
is a s/t showing bid, and definitely not a 3NT what's the problem?

Calm hasn't indicated whether his hand was intended to be opposite a weak or a strong no trump. The problem with this method is there are plenty of hands like:

Kxx, Kxx, AJxx, Axx (take away J♦ if you want a weak no trump) where you find your fit, and play in a bad 5♦ instead of a good 3N. They lead a heart most of the time even when the ace is wrong against 3N but not against 5♦, and this is a non trivial consideration. If you think you'd be in 3N with the hand I give then partner will have Axx, Q, Qxxxx, KQxx where 5♦ is near laydown and 3N requires the diamond finesse or a 3-3 club break if you have the J♦, and a 3-3 club break if you don't.

Where you only have 25-26 points between the two hands, 11 tricks (and only 2 losers) can be a lot to ask with a 5431 opposite a balanced hand.

Certainly in the UK, you can be sure opposite a weak no trump, if you just bid 3N you'll be doing what most of the field will do (possibly transferring to ♦ first).

We use 1N-3M as the old fashioned forcing, suit setting with slam ambitions, so that partner starts cue bidding immediately with anything vaguely suitable.

We could use 1N-2♣-2♦-3M for this, but choose to use this looking for 4-4 minor suit fits on 4m4M/m32 type slamgoing hands.

[Zelandakh]

1axbycz1, are you a beginner or an intermediate? If you are a beginner then I would suggest first going through the instructional text on 1NT Openings within the BBO Software. You can find this on "Other bridge Activities" -> "Learn to Play Bridge". If you are a stronger intermediate and looking to become advanced then it becomes worthwhile to look at some of these conventional treatments that are being put forward. Otherwise I would suggest becoming completely comfortable with the basic set-up before moving onto something more complex.

[1axbycz1]

I have gone through the program, which teaches transfers and stayman with 5-4. However, it doesnt teach me how to bid minors.

[bluecalm]

Quote

Kxx, Kxx, AJxx, Axx (take away J♦ if you want a weak no trump) where you find your fit, and play in a bad 5♦ instead of a good 3N. They lead a heart most of the time even when the ace is wrong against 3N but not against 5♦, and this is a non trivial consideration. If you think you'd be in 3N with the hand I give then partner will have Axx, Q, Qxxxx, KQxx where 5♦ is near laydown and 3N requires the diamond finesse or a 3-3 club break if you have the J♦, and a 3-3 club break if you don't.

3M bids are not mandatory you know. Having stiff Q and weakish hand you can go to 3NT directly.
Anyway, it's always possible to construct hands where given treatment goes wrong. So what ? It's big winner in the long run. Instead of constructing examples to fit your view just deal 50-100 hands with given constraints using some free simulator and see for yourself. Or just trust 95% of elite players who play that way...

[hanp]

Didn't read the whole thread but I agree with bluecalm. Bidding 3H with a GF 3-1-5-4 shape is often good imo.

By the way, as far as I know the Garner-Weinstein partnership still exists. They beat us in the Spingold this summer.

[bluecalm]

Quote

By the way, as far as I know the Garner-Weinstein partnership still exists. They beat us in the Spingold this summer. 

My sources are only vugraph and convention cards I drew wrong conclusions.

[Cyberyeti]

bluecalm, on Sep 8 2010, 05:27 AM, said:

Quote

Kxx, Kxx, AJxx, Axx (take away J♦ if you want a weak no trump) where you find your fit, and play in a bad 5♦ instead of a good 3N. They lead a heart most of the time even when the ace is wrong against 3N but not against 5♦, and this is a non trivial consideration. If you think you'd be in 3N with the hand I give then partner will have Axx, Q, Qxxxx, KQxx where 5♦ is near laydown and 3N requires the diamond finesse or a 3-3 club break if you have the J♦, and a 3-3 club break if you don't.

3M bids are not mandatory you know. Having stiff Q and weakish hand you can go to 3NT directly.
Anyway, it's always possible to construct hands where given treatment goes wrong. So what ? It's big winner in the long run. Instead of constructing examples to fit your view just deal 50-100 hands with given constraints using some free simulator and see for yourself. Or just trust 95% of elite players who play that way...

95% hype much ?

Certainly in the UK it's nothing like that high although some do, with the numbers going up as the standard improves.

My experience of both indicated that at just below top class, playing it when most of the field wasn't generated some 95% scores when I would have got 45%, but generated some near zeroes when I would have had 55%, and in approximately equal numbers. So I gave it up as it played against the field and didn't seem to give a huge advantage.

It may well be that at top international level where most of the pairs play it, it is 10% better and not against the field so you should use it, but below that the advantages are pretty dubious, particularly if you think you're in the top part of the field anyway most of the time so don't want to randomise.

[hanp]

mgoetze, on Sep 5 2010, 12:50 PM, said:

bluecalm, on Sep 5 2010, 06:00 PM, said:

Axx
x
KQxxx
QTxx



after 1NT ?

3NT, WTP?

I encourage you to randomly deal some hands where partner opens 1NT and you hold this hand.

What you will see is that on many hands you get to a good 3NT anyway, and bidding 3H has no effect on the outcome.

What you will also see is that there are almost no hands where partner bids 3NT and our bidding significantly helps the opponents with the opening lead. If they have a different natural lead but decide to lead a heart instead, it is as often wrong as right.

Finally, you will see that there is a significant number of hands where 5m or 4S (when partner has a 5-card spade suit!) is cold, and 3NT has no chance.

In my mind bidding 3NT with this is is indeed a P.

[Zelandakh]

1axbycz1, on Sep 7 2010, 01:37 PM, said:

I have gone through the program, which teaches transfers and stayman with 5-4. However, it doesnt teach me how to bid minors.

I don't play SAYC but I will try to explain the standards there as I understand them.

With a weak hand and a long minor bid 2S. Opener is required to bid 3C which you pass or convert to 3D.

With an invitational hand with a good long minor bid 3 of the minor. Opener should re-evaluate their hand and generally choose between pass and 3NT. A top honour in partner's suit is s particularly useful card in this re-evaluation.

With a game-going hand and no slam interest Responder should usually ignore the minor and simply bid 3NT.

With slam interest Responder typically starts with 2C Stayman and rebids their minor. The auction then proceeds along natural lines.

An improvement on the above is to use 4-way transfers. In this method a response of 2S shows clubs (weak or strong) and a response of 2NT is diamonds (again weak/strong). Since you have lost your natural 2NT response you must use 2C Stayman on such hands. The method makes some hands simpler but the gain is not huge. It is worth looking into when you are ready though.

There are additional improvements that can be made to cover 4441 and (13)(54) hands but these are probably not worth your time and effort at present. It is this that the off-topic discussion in your thread is about. Again my recommendation would be to forget about this for now.

[P_Marlowe]

1axbycz1, on Sep 5 2010, 02:59 AM, said:

<snip>
I want to ask this, because my current bidding system is pretty good for bidding slam in majors, but not the minors. Bidding 5c/5d is a very low priority especially when partner is balanced, but what about 6c/6d?
However, when coming to slams, I feel that I need a way to bid such hands, and the direct 6c/6d bids do not look good to me as i tried it when lacking 2 aces and got down. Gerber 4c may come into the rescue, but I cannot sign off in 5c! Then what about 5-4-4-0 hands? NT doesnt look good, but I cannot just insist on my 5-card suit, in case partner has only 2.
<snip>

Some general comments

#1 Bidding minor suit slams, is not the easiest thing, even after a NT opening bid,
and this happens to be even true for real experts.
#2 5440 hands are always tough to bid, I am not sure which shape is harder to
bid the 4441 shape or the 5440 shape, the good thing, they dont come up very
often, so it usually does not hurt to ignore the existence of those shapes.

The above does not answer your original question, but may help you to
evaluate, if it makes sense or not to spend time on this specific issue.

Slam bidding is fun, but the money usually gets burned not investing time in
more boring topics.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: To help you, with more than wise remarks, you may search the Forum
for response NT structres.
#1 Keri (my impression is, that Keri is usually played with a weak NT)
http://www.actuarialoutpost.com/actuarial_...ad.php?t=118240

There is a booke written by Ron Klinger "Bid Better, Much Better After Opening 1 No-Trump" , that explains Keri in detail, see

http://www.amazon.com/Better-Opening-No-Tr...e/dp/0304357766

#2 Henman (I believe Free did described the response structure on BBF), a simplified version of Keri.

The main issue with those and similar conventions is, that your response structure
after a 1NT and after a 2NT opening will be different.
From a theoretical point this makes sense, since you have more room after a 1NT
opening than after a 2NT opening, but from a practical point view - it adds to
memory load.

[1axbycz1]

More boring topics, like what?

[the hog]

P_Marlowe, on Sep 8 2010, 09:22 PM, said:

#1 Keri (my impression is, that Keri is usually played with a weak NT)

No. It is actually more commonly played with a strong NT, but of course, can be played with both.

[Mbodell]

The_Hog, on Sep 8 2010, 07:24 PM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Sep 8 2010, 09:22 PM, said:

#1 Keri (my impression is, that Keri is usually played with a weak NT)

No. It is actually more commonly played with a strong NT, but of course, can be played with both.

And over a mini nt or a 18-19 nt or a 19-21 nt or really any range.

Just like stayman and transfers and natural quantitative can be played over any range. A transfer to a major and then 2nt playing standard means the same thing (5 card suit and invitational strength) even if the HCP associated with an invite is ~11 opposite a weak nt and ~8.5 opposite a strong nt.

[hanp]

What on earth is Keri doing in the B/I forum? Somebody who has only learned Stayman and transfers is asking what other bids mean, it's very poor advice to recommend an entirely different system of responses!