[mike777]

ZILLON POSTS

1) many good players play it


2) many good players dont

fwiw I think one can not play it and win and play it and win

[Zelandakh]

32519, on 2012-November-17, 00:03, said:

How does your auction change when opener has 5X♥ and 3X♠, responder has 2X♥ and 5X♠? How is opener to know that the ♠ suit contains 5-cards?

If Responder has 5233, should they not be starting with a transfer? As has been said many times, if you use a convention badly you are likely to get sub-optimal results; this is not the fault of the convention.

[32519]

To bring this thread up to date these two posts have been copied in from elsewhere:

32519, on 2013-July-30, 23:20, said:

On the downside we have the Puppet Stayman sequence as an example. Unless you come up with something more convincing, Puppet Stayman is a loser.
What do I gain with PS?
1. I can include 5-card majors in my 1NT bid if it falls in the range
What do I lose with PS?
1. An immediate 2/1 GF auction (although this won’t be a problem because you will get to game anyway, but with the GF auction initiated, your mindset changes towards the bidding while looking for the best spot to play)
2. The ability to raise immediately to level 4 with a weak hand but long in trumps
3. Splinter bids
4. Bergen raises
5. Fit jumps
6. Jacoby 2NT
7. Jacoby 3NT
And an even bigger downside, additional memory load to uncover a possible 5-3 or 4-4 fit in the major.

To which gwnn replied (also copied in):

32519, on 2013-July-30, 23:20, said:

What do I gain with PS?
1. I can include 5-card majors in my 1NT bid if it falls in the range

gwnn, on 2013-July-31, 00:26, said:

And several other things mentioned by others and misunderstood/misconstrued/ignored by you in the thread. Anyway your post is making some category errors too but let's leave it at that since this is not a bridge thread.

[Free]

You can bring every thread of yours up to date with that quote of gwnn.

[Zelandakh]

As has been pointed out many times, your biggest gain from including 5M(332) hands within 1NT comes when you open 1M and are known to hold an unbalanced hand. That you can sort these things out relatively painlessly after 1NT makes the loss small, possibly but not certainly smaller than the gain. But you already know this because it has been discussed umpteen times.

This is a similar, but more compelling, argument to taking strong 4441 hands out of the 1m openings by using a specialised sequence (Multi, Benji, Roman) or of taking strong 2-suiters out of the strong opening with specialised bids (MisIry). The difference is that Puppet has a smaller impact than the other possibilities mentioned here. Are the gains also less? That might depend on the rest of your system. How comfortable are you with your rebid options after 1M - 1NT holding (5-3)=3=2 and a hand within NT range? Can you sort everything out here more easily than having opened 1NT? Probably not, and remember that all of the losses mentioned in your post are gains when Responder makes these calls knowing Opener is unbalanced.

Put another way, I have a system and a few hands are left over that I have a choice of how to bid. Wherever I put these hands, we can point to a disadvantage if we only consider the sequence/opening where they are. More hands for the same bidding space = less accuracy. It really is that simple sometimes. So if you open 5M332 hands 1M then your 1M sequences are at a disadvantage; if you open them 1NT then your 1NT sequences are at a disadvantage. The question is simply which disadvantage is smaller and therefore which system works better overall. You cannot only look at 1NT nor only look at 1M to answer this. There is also a third option - open the 5M332 hands 1NT but ignore this in the response structure. Again, you need to look at the effects on both 1NT and 1M auctions to evaluate this.

And please, make a print-out of this post and read it before every bidding theory post you make. Before stating the advantages and disadvantages of a convention ask yourself whether you have really looked at all sequences affected. Also ask yourself if you have really evaluated the frequency of gain for all approaches correctly. Until you can look at a bidding system as a whole in this way, there is little point in these discussions. That would be a shame; I enjoy discussing bidding theory greatly. But it is really no fun to write a long post explaining the pros and cons of something, only to see only one side of the argument presented a few pages later as a summary or even "fact".

[gwnn]

Or the one from mgoetze:

Quote

Anyone care to perform the following sim:

32519 starts a thread on system
A knowledgable poster writes an answer

Identify the frequency with which

1. 32519 listens to any advice which does not agree with his foregone conclusions
2. Anyone learns anything

[the hog]

Day after day, alone on the hill........

[mike777]

the hog, on 2013-August-01, 01:48, said:

Day after day, alone on the hill........

[manudude03]

Just when I think the quality of the arguments couldn't get any worse.

Quote

On the downside we have the Puppet Stayman sequence as an example. Unless you come up with something more convincing, Puppet Stayman is a loser.
What do I gain with PS?
1. I can include 5-card majors in my 1NT bid if it falls in the range
What do I lose with PS?
1. An immediate 2/1 GF auction (although this won’t be a problem because you will get to game anyway, but with the GF auction initiated, your mindset changes towards the bidding while looking for the best spot to play)
2. The ability to raise immediately to level 4 with a weak hand but long in trumps
3. Splinter bids
4. Bergen raises
5. Fit jumps
6. Jacoby 2NT
7. Jacoby 3NT
And an even bigger downside, additional memory load to uncover a possible 5-3 or 4-4 fit in the major.

It looks like you're more arguing that you shouldn't open 1NT with a 5 card major, that's all well and good, and you will at least get some support for that, but allowing yourself to open 1NT with a 5 card major doesn't mean you have to play puppet stayman.

[rhm]

Zelandakh, on 2013-August-01, 01:34, said:

And please, make a print-out of this post and read it before every bidding theory post you make. Before stating the advantages and disadvantages of a convention ask yourself whether you have really looked at all sequences affected. Also ask yourself if you have really evaluated the frequency of gain for all approaches correctly. Until you can look at a bidding system as a whole in this way, there is little point in these discussions. That would be a shame; I enjoy discussing bidding theory greatly. But it is really no fun to write a long post explaining the pros and cons of something, only to see only one side of the argument presented a few pages later as a summary or even "fact".

Wish I could do that.
I try.
But there are so many creative aspects and criteria people come up with, all of which can only be weighted subjectively, that this is impossible to do comprehensively.
Some do a more convincing job and some do worse, usually dependent how good and experienced the person as a Bridge player is.
For example you yourself wondered why Multi might be a winner at all when used directly, considering a weak two more effective and claiming that Multi's main advantage is in overall system construction freeing other bids.

There was a recent intriguing discussion on bridgewinners

http://bridgewinners...ss-competition/

which shed some interesting aspects why this convention might be effective after all and how to use it.

With regard to PS, it's advantages and disadvantages and its variants have been discussed to death. As usual there remain

the convinced
the skeptical
the ones, who do not care.

I belonged to each of these buckets at some stage in my Bridge career

Rainer Herrmann

[32519]

rhm, on 2013-August-01, 06:54, said:

With regard to PS, <snip> its variants have been discussed to death.

Rainer Herrmann

Here is a new variant which I saw for the first time in a recent tournament:
RHO opened 1NT (announced as 15-17 HCP)
2♣ (alerted and asking for any 5-card suit, not necessarily a major suit)
So now a reasonably long enquiry session ensued as to how the bidding continues and what each bid would show. This was the answer I got:
2♦ = Denies a 5-card major but promises at least one 4-card major
2♥/2♠ = 5-card major
2NT = Denies a 4-card major and a 5-card minor
3♣/3♦ = 5-card minor

The pair still got to the routine 4♠ contract via the following sequence -
1NT-2♣
2♦-2♥
4♠-All Pass

4♠ was an easy make, nothing to it.

Anyone else seen this method before? Your thoughts on it?

[Zelandakh]

First of all, you are not allowed to ask about future bids, or rather your opps do not have to answer you. You can ask about bids made and alternative calls to those made. Secondly, the method suffers from the same problem as extended responses to Stayman; you probably lose more than you gain. Note that this response structure effectively makes 2♣ game forcing, which they should have informed you about when you asked. Presumably they have some other method to handle invitational hands with a 4 card major.

As always, we would need to see the entire structure to make a proper judgement. You cannot simply take an isolated part and judge everything from that.

[Free]

Yes I've seen the method, I'm not fond of any form of Puppet Stayman at 2-level, and I think it's a very poor choice to make a double jump to 4♠ when partner is unlimited.

[RGranville]

In most systems you need to be able to open 2NT with a 5 card major, so Puppet Stayman is pretty much essential after a 2NT opening.

Whether to open 1NT with a 5 card major is more debatable, but using Puppet Stayman means that you can't use Stayman on weak hands, which is a particular drawback playing weak NT.

But it is possible to employ some fairly unused sequences after regular Stayman to find most 5-3 major suit fits.

I'm assuming a fairly standard scheme of responses, i.e. direct 3C/3D invitational, direct 3H/3S slam try, 3C/3D via Stayman GF, 3H/3S after Stayman and a 2D rebid 5-4 in the majors - perhaps Smolen.

With interest in a 5-3 major suit fit, you use regular Stayman as usual. If opener rebids 2D, then there are no further problems.

If opener shows a major suit, this may be 4 or 5 cards. Responder can make use of the rarely used bids in the other major, as follows:


Rebids after 1NT – 2♣ – 2♥
2♠ 4+ card spade suit. If responder has enough for game, he might have interest in a 5-3 heart fit.
2NT Denies 4 spades, therefore invitational with interest in a 5-3 heart fit.
3NT Denies 4 spades, therefore interest in a 5-3 heart fit.

Rebids after 1NT – 2♣ – 2♥ – 2♠
2NT Minimum, not 4 spades, 4 or 5 hearts. Responder bids 3♥ if he wants to play in a 5-3 heart fit.
3♣ Maximum, not 4 spades, 4 or 5 hearts. Responder bids 3♥ if he wants to play in a 5-3 heart fit.
3♠ Minimum, 4 spades.
4♠ Maximum, 4 spades.

Rebids after 1NT – 2♣ – 2♠
2NT Invitational with 4 hearts.
3♥ Interest in a 5-3 heart fit.
3NT No interest in a 5-3 heart fit.

I've devised this fairly recently and haven't yet had a chance to play it, but it seems to address the main issues.

[gnasher]

 RGranville, on 2013-August-23, 05:06, said:

In most systems you need to be able to open 2NT with a 5 card major, so Puppet Stayman is pretty much essential after a 2NT opening.

That's a non-sequitur. For Puppet Stayman to be beneficial, let alone essential, two other conditions would have to be met:
- Being able to find a 5-3 major-suit fit gains overall.
- The cost of playing Puppet Stayman on other deals doesn't outweigh this gain.

[Zelandakh]

More than this, the next line was wrong too.

 RGranville, on 2013-August-23, 05:06, said:

using Puppet Stayman means that you can't use Stayman on weak hands, which is a particular drawback playing weak NT.

Playing regular Stayman you use Exit Stayman with a weak hand and (roughly) 3+ hearts, 3+ spades, 4+ diamonds. Playing Puppet Stayman you use Exit Stayman with (roughly) 2+ hearts, 2+ spades, 5+ diamonds. Moreover, if you are clever and run your weak diamond takeouts through 2♣, you get to stop in 2♦ considerably more often playing Puppet than regular Stayman. So to say that Puppet cannot be used on weak hands is just wrong. Better to say that it is used on a slightly different set of weak hands.

As for your new sequences, as far as I can see you have no strong raise after a 2♠ response when using 3♥ in this way. That is a major loss. Perhaps you can improve this by using an "unused" sequence after a 2♦ transfer to check back for a 3-5 spade fit instead.

[rhm]

 gnasher, on 2013-August-23, 06:01, said:

That's a non-sequitur. For Puppet Stayman to be beneficial, let alone essential, two other conditions would have to be met:
- Being able to find a 5-3 major-suit fit gains overall.
- The cost of playing Puppet Stayman on other deals doesn't outweigh this gain.

+1

Rainer Herrmann

[32519]

 Zelandakh, on 2013-August-23, 06:25, said:

Playing regular Stayman you use Exit Stayman with a weak hand and (roughly) 3+ hearts, 3+ spades, 4+ diamonds. Playing Puppet Stayman you use Exit Stayman with (roughly) 2+ hearts, 2+ spades, 5+ diamonds. Moreover, if you are clever and run your weak diamond takeouts through 2♣, you get to stop in 2♦ considerably more often playing Puppet than regular Stayman. So to say that Puppet cannot be used on weak hands is just wrong. Better to say that it is used on a slightly different set of weak hands.

Amazing, after 203 replies since this thread was started we have a REAL SECOND BENEFIT in playing Puppet Stayman, you can stop in 2♦ with a ♦ bust.

[Zelandakh]

 32519, on 2013-August-23, 07:43, said:

Amazing, after 203 replies since this thread was started we have a REAL SECOND BENEFIT in playing Puppet Stayman, you can stop in 2♦ with a ♦ bust.

Proof positive that my posts are not being read. See #164, #41 and #6. That is the 5th reply and it took until #205 to register!

[mgoetze]

 RGranville, on 2013-August-23, 05:06, said:

I'm assuming a fairly standard scheme of responses, i.e. direct 3C/3D invitational, direct 3H/3S slam try, 3C/3D via Stayman GF, 3H/3S after Stayman and a 2D rebid 5-4 in the majors - perhaps Smolen.

Standard in which decade?