[32519]

If you allow 5-card majors in your 1NT 15-17 HCP range, what does one do in this bidding sequence?

---

You have a good 5-card ♥ suit.
Partner is asking you to transfer into your worst suit. Do you pass 2♥ or do you complete the transfer?

[wyman]

I don't like to play partials when we might have a game on, so I obviously complete.

[mgoetze]

I hope you are all feeling good about yourselves helping a famous bridge author get to the bottom of such difficult questions as "should I pass a forcing bid?"

[G_R__E_G]

In bridge there are two things you always accept from partner; a transfer and an offer of a breath mint.

[Quartic]

32519, on 2012-March-15, 09:06, said:

If you allow 5-card majors in your 1NT 15-17 HCP range, what does one do in this bidding sequence?

---

You have a good 5-card ♥ suit.
Partner is asking you to transfer into your worst suit. Do you pass 2♥ or do you complete the transfer?

Complete the transfer of course - partner doesn't have to be weak with 5 spades - we could miss 4♠ or 3NT if I pass. (And yes, I realise the question was probably rhetorical.)

[G_R__E_G]

mgoetze, on 2012-March-15, 09:38, said:

I hope you are all feeling good about yourselves helping a famous bridge author get to the bottom of such difficult questions as "should I pass a forcing bid?"

I actually lol'd on that one. Is it really the same person?

PS I've checked my calendar, it is not April 1st.

[aguahombre]

I thought Andrew was joking, and people were going to bite/ answer seriously. I was half right; Michael cleared up the first part for us.

[barmar]

Don't forget the old rule of thumb: it's usually better to play in the long suit of the weaker hand.

[aguahombre]

G_R__E_G, on 2012-March-15, 09:52, said:

I actually lol'd on that one. Is it really the same person?

PS I've checked my calendar, it is not April 1st.

I don't think it was published on April 1st, either.

[kenrexford]

IMO, the main reason why people play Muppet (or some version of Muppet) over a 2NT opening is that they only know three main ideas -- Regular Stayman, Puppet Stayman, or Muppet Stayman. When considering these three, Muppet seems best.

What I mean is that this is a sequence (2NT-P-3♣) where there are not a large number of alternatives that are well known out there to weigh against each other. So, when a convention is weighed against what you give up, but no one has a club what is actually being forfeit, then your weighting is fairly easy to work out.

Now, this is not to say that there are not alternatives that are not so well known that might be interesting alternatives to Muppet.

[Vampyr]

32519, on 2012-March-15, 09:06, said:

If you allow 5-card majors in your 1NT 15-17 HCP range, what does one do in this bidding sequence?

---

You have a good 5-card ♥ suit.
Partner is asking you to transfer into your worst suit. Do you pass 2♥ or do you complete the transfer?

This hand is much too good for a 15-17 1NT, but even if it were a bit weaker the hearts are, in many people's opinion, too strong as well.

[aguahombre]

Vampyr, on 2012-March-15, 13:16, said:

This hand is much too good for a 15-17 1NT, but even if it were a bit weaker the hearts are, in many people's opinion, too strong as well.

All very true. For some 5cM notrumpers, they don't do it with 17, whether upgraded to more or not.

Also, all very irrelevant to this thread; and I apologize for continuing the hijack....sort of

[32519]

mgoetze, on 2012-March-15, 09:38, said:

I hope you are all feeling good about yourselves helping a famous bridge author get to the bottom of such difficult questions as "should I pass a forcing bid?"

For those who don’t know what mgoetze is referring to, you will need the read the thread Defence to a 1NT Opening Bid (post 83 on page 5 of this thread and post 97 also on page 5).

aguahombre, on 2012-March-15, 09:54, said:

I thought Andrew was joking, and people were going to bite/ answer seriously. I was half right; Michael cleared up the first part for us.

Aguahombre is partially correct. I often post on topics I already have SOME of the answers. Posts in other threads sometimes flick the switch for possible alternative ways for using “mainstream” bids differently. Case in point here is the current Multi and Defence to a 1NT Opening Bid. The thread on Jacoby 2NT hopefully got those interested to reconsider whether their current use of Jacoby 2NT is optimal.

This thread on Puppet Stayman is no different. Posts in other threads got me thinking about the effectiveness of the current conventional agreements. But before I can decide whether any “tweak” will work better or not, I try to get some feedback on things I may not have thought of previously.

So thanks to those who chose to answer honestly and sensibly. The day we meet, I am sure that mgoetze and I will become good friends. Until then, I would like to request mgoetze to do a review of my book and do a write up in the Bridge Material Review Forum. When you do, please bear in mind what I said in the “Defence to a 1NT Opening Bid” thread. The book won’t become popular as a “stand alone” convention. Build it into a Multi purpose bid as suggested and suddenly it becomes very attractive indeed.

What is Muppet Stayman? How does it differ from Stayman and Puppet Stayman?

Thanks again all.

[bluecalm]

Puppet stayman eats up precious and, especially after 2NT opening, deficient resource which is bidding space. If you use it with run of the mill 3-2 in majors hand you will be worse of than people who bid direct 3NT because first you usually don't have 5-3 fit anyway, second it may not play better than 3nt and third and most important you give them free information and chance to double 3C. 3-1-(5-4) hands are too rare to bother about them and again usually you don't have 5-3 major fit anyway but are leaking info as always.
Imo the convention sucks and is probably the worst convention used by elite partnerships.

[Free]

Are we talking about Puppet Stayman after 1NT openings or after 2NT openings?

[bluecalm]

Haha, good point. I automatically assumed it's after 2N, because nobody plays it after 1N here... oh Americans...

[aguahombre]

bluecalm, on 2012-March-15, 15:28, said:

Imo the convention sucks and is probably the worst convention used by elite partnerships.

I assume you mean after 2NT; and also assume you mean if they use continuations other that those which Mikeh recommended in a previous thread which I can't find at the moment.

I am an avid student of what "elite" partnerships do to tweak their structure, but not a critic of them, since they have given a lot of thought into the plusses, minuses, and inferences involved.

Aside from that, those critical of Americans in general are mostly those who haven't gotten over the results in 1776 or 1812. Most Americans, gauche as we are, have gotten past it.

[bluecalm]

Yes I mean after 2N and I mean puppet in general as a convention designed to detect 5 card majors in opener hand at the cost of bidding space better used for other things.

Quote

I am an avid student of what "elite" partnerships do to tweak their structure, but not a critic of them, since they have given a lot of thought into the plusses, minuses, and inferences involved.

My attitude is to give a lot of respect to opinions of elite players and my default is to strongly believe that what they are doing is in fact best. Here though I spent enough time to analyse it to have my own opinion and be almost sure they get it wrong.
This is small error though and doesn't cost them that much in the long run so that's probably they either missed it or didn't bother to fix it. Or I could be wrong of course

[mgoetze]

32519, on 2012-March-15, 15:16, said:

For those who don’t know what mgoetze is referring to, you will need the read the thread Defence to a 1NT Opening Bid (post 83 on page 5 of this thread and post 97 also on page 5).

I feel cheated rereading the last paragraph of your post 97.

Quote

So thanks to those who chose to answer honestly and sensibly. The day we meet, I am sure that mgoetze and I will become good friends. Until then, I would like to request mgoetze to do a review of my book and do a write up in the Bridge Material Review Forum. When you do, please bear in mind what I said in the “Defence to a 1NT Opening Bid” thread.

Sure, no problem. You can find the mailing address for the review copy by querying the PSI-USA whois database for mgoetze.net.

bluecalm, on 2012-March-15, 15:28, said:

Puppet stayman eats up precious and, especially after 2NT opening, deficient resource which is bidding space. If you use it with run of the mill 3-2 in majors hand you will be worse of than people who bid direct 3NT because first you usually don't have 5-3 fit anyway, second it may not play better than 3nt and third and most important you give them free information and chance to double 3C. 3-1-(5-4) hands are too rare to bother about them and again usually you don't have 5-3 major fit anyway but are leaking info as always.
Imo the convention sucks and is probably the worst convention used by elite partnerships.

"Convention X is bad because people use it when they shouldn't" is surely a classical model for a strawman argument. So, (31)(54) hands are too rare for you. What about 33(52) or 33(61) hands? Etc.

Of course since you never have a 5-3 major fit anyway you should surely not play Puppet Stayman or anything of the sort. I sometimes do have a 5-3 major fit, however, so I will continue to play it.

[bluecalm]

Quote

"Convention X is bad because people use it when they shouldn't" is surely a classical model for a strawman argument. So, (31)(54) hands are too rare for you. What about 33(52) or 33(61) hands? Etc.

I said that with those rare hand when you could want to use puppet you are probably not better off anyway because of free info given but even if you are better off with those very rare hands you lose on run of the mill hands when you need space for different things than checking for 5 card major.
My argument wasn't: "people use it when they shouldn't" but "it covers very rare situations when it's not clear you are better off anyway but it costs you with hands which are both frequent and more important to cover.