gurgistan, on 2011-February-05, 20:57, said:
It's not about point count.
Not using Stayman is about not tipping off opponents to the best line to take against you when you are in 3N.
I am just wondering if this spot was one where that applied.
Well, with 31 HCP, it's not very likely that bidding stayman will be tipping off opponents, hence I disagree. I do agree with other posters that with that many points, 3N usually rates to be the better contract, but there is a real risk of missing a cold 6
♠. Jorrit probably sums it up the best.
jschafer, on 2011-February-06, 08:32, said:
Which weakness are you trying to hide by bidding 3NT? If anything, thinking you have a weakness is a case for bidding stayman rather than 3NT. With a suit wide open for the defence to attack you want to be ruffing that suit if possible, not discarding on it by playing NT. If they do have a suit that poses a danger when you have this many hcps they must have a lot of length in it and will lead it regardless of your bidding (even though I don't think stayman here is very revealing). The presence of a threatening suit also increases the chances your side has a ♠ fit.
Yet it seems quite unlikely that you are going down in 3NT irrespective of which suit they lead, your side rates to have honours everywhere. Nevertheless they could have a whole stack of hearts opposite partner's xx(x) with an inconveniently placed King or so, then you may get unlucky and go down in 3NT (with 6♠ maybe being cold!). If you bid stayman you could find a fit in ♠ and play there or bid 3NT later if you don't (4♠ rates to score better than 3NT with a ♠ fit, especially with AAK instead of slow tricks). An additional and perhaps more important advantage of stayman is that if you do have a fit, you have an excellent hand to make a slam try with all those controls.