[MickyB]

Playing 2C Stayman as well as either 2N or 3C as Puppet, which route should you take with 4-2 in the majors, either way? Meckwell bid Stayman, but I believe they are in the minority, which is odd - they play 2N Puppet, which rates to do slightly better than 3C Puppet due to the latter giving up a lead-directing double.

Assuming 2S4H and using 3C Puppet -

- When you have a 4-4 heart fit, you give up a double of 3S by going through Puppet.
- When opener has five spades, you give more info away by going through Puppet. This feels kinda significant, as 1N:2C, 2S can still have 2-5 cards in each minor, whereas 1N:3C, 3S basically shows 2-3 cards in each minor.
- When opener has precisely 4 spades, you disclose this unnecessarily by going through Stayman. Puppet gives up the double of 3S.
- When opener has 2-3 spades, Puppet makes the lead easier [you know dummy has four hearts, and you give up a double of 3S. Compare this with 1N:2C, 2D:3N when you don't know which major to try]. Stayman makes the later defence easier as declarer has denied four spades.

- If you always bid Puppet on these hands, then 1N:2C, 2D:3N shows 4-4 majors, which must help the lead. However, this means that 1N:2C, 2M:3N can be used as artificial, if you think you can remember it - including not starting with Stayman and finding yourself with no rebid!

Feels close, any thoughts?

[Free]

As far as I know Meckwell prefer quick auctions. Fast arrival when possible, don't give opps opportunities to bid or Dbl, don't give too much info away,...

Stayman follows this principle, as it's faster than Puppet to find a 4-4 fit (1NT-2C-2X-game vs 1NT-2NT-3C-3M-game/1NT-2NT-3M-game). Opener also doesn't have to give away unnecessary info: he shows 4-5 ♥s, while after Puppet he has shown exactly 4 or exactly 5. The only upside for Puppet is when opener holds <4♥ and 4♠s exactly, so that advantage is quite small imo.

Note: Puppet 2NT gives opps 3 opportunities to double: 2NT, 3C and 3M (showing the other M), although doubling 3♣ isn't very useful for the lead and most opps don't have a meaning for 1NT-(p)-2NT-(Dbl). But why take the risk? Stayman gives opps only 1 opportunity to Dbl: 2C.

[rhm]

I do not get it.
I thought the whole purpose of playing Puppet in addition to Stayman is to hide information from opponents.
If this is not the case (or it is extremely close) and you are avoiding Puppet, what is actually the point of Puppet in addition to Stayman in the first place?

What hands for responder remain where Puppet is actually useful?

Rainer Herrmann

[gnasher]

rhm, on 2012-July-20, 04:15, said:

I do not get it.
I thought the whole purpose of playing Puppet in addition to Stayman is to hide information from opponents.
If this is not the case (or it is extremely close) and you are avoiding Puppet, what is actually the point of Puppet in addition to Stayman in the first place?

What hands for responder remain where Puppet is actually useful?

Rainer Herrmann

There are at least two other benefits to playing Puppet: it allows you to find find a 5-3 major-suit fit whilst not losing a 4-4 fit, and it allows you to play the 4-4 fits from opener's side. When responder is 3424, Puppet allows you to reach a 5-3 spade fit or a 4-4 heart fit from the right side, whereas Stayman does neither.

[MickyB]

rhm, on 2012-July-20, 04:15, said:

What hands for responder remain where Puppet is actually useful?

I guess Meckwell are using it to find 5-3 fits

[rhm]

gnasher, on 2012-July-20, 04:36, said:

There are at least two other benefits to playing Puppet: it allows you to find find a 5-3 major-suit fit whilst not losing a 4-4 fit, and it allows you to play the 4-4 fits from opener's side. When responder is 3424, Puppet allows you to reach a 5-3 spade fit or a 4-4 heart fit from the right side, whereas Stayman does neither.

Why would 4-4 fits in a major from the right side get lost by Stayman?
Stayman continuations have not been adapted to uncover 5-3 fits it is true, because in the past there was no need for that.
Whether there is a need for it now can be argued.
I rarely miss it, even though I frequently open 1NT with a 5 card major and I am not always 5332.
The biggest drawbacks of this approach come when partner is too weak for either Puppet or Stayman, not when he has a game force.
Finding 5-3 fits, where the strong hand has the length are over-judged.
I have always thought that the more intelligent arguments for Puppet were information hiding, while the weaker players abused it to find "fits" in endless varieties.

Rainer Herrmann

[gnasher]

rhm, on 2012-July-20, 05:15, said:

Why would 4-4 fits in a major from the right side get lost by Stayman?

Sorry, I'm not sure what was going through my mind when I said that.

[MickyB]

rhm, on 2012-July-20, 04:15, said:

I thought the whole purpose of playing Puppet in addition to Stayman is to hide information from opponents.

I was thinking about this again yesterday. I've concluded that -

- Bidding Puppet with 4-3 majors is clearly better, on average, than bidding Stayman with 4-3 majors, *even when you don't find a 5-3 fit*. 1N:3C, 3M:3N when responder is 4-2 majors is pretty awful in terms of giving info away about declarer's hand.

- There is a case for being able to take either route with 4-2 majors. That way, 1N:2C, 2D:3N doesn't show 4-4 majors, and 1N:3C, 3M:3N doesn't show 3-2 majors [strongly suggesting a lead of the other major].

- Say you are (42)(52) with Hx in the major and xx in the minor. I think it's right to bid puppet, prepared to play 4M in the 5-2 fit, because you suspect that your coverage of the minor isn't great opposite a 2-3 card holding.

[rhm]

MickyB, on 2012-August-05, 05:38, said:

I was thinking about this again yesterday. I've concluded that -

- Bidding Puppet with 4-3 majors is clearly better, on average, than bidding Stayman with 4-3 majors, *even when you don't find a 5-3 fit*. 1N:3C, 3M:3N when responder is 4-2 majors is pretty awful in terms of giving info away about declarer's hand.

- There is a case for being able to take either route with 4-2 majors. That way, 1N:2C, 2D:3N doesn't show 4-4 majors, and 1N:3C, 3M:3N doesn't show 3-2 majors [strongly suggesting a lead of the other major].

- Say you are (42)(52) with Hx in the major and xx in the minor. I think it's right to bid puppet, prepared to play 4M in the 5-2 fit, because you suspect that your coverage of the minor isn't great opposite a 2-3 card holding.

When you start to narrow down responders types of hands on which puppet over one notrump has a supposed advantage, you also need to revalue the question, whether it is really worthwhile to reserve a complete bid (3♣) and its continuations for that purpose over one notrump.
I get the nagging feeling it might not be worth it. There should be a better use for this bid.
Also you now get all sorts of information leakage.
For example you should then start to alert sequences like 1NT-2♣-2♦-3NT* saying to the opening leader something like: "Responder is likely to be either 4-4 or 4-2 in the majors to employ this sequence."
This might well influence the opening leader. Similar consideration apply when Puppet sequences are employed. I am uncertain how many Bridge players do this, though everybody claims to believe in full disclosure.

Rainer Herrmann

[MickyB]

rhm, on 2012-August-05, 06:42, said:

When you start to narrow down responders types of hands on which puppet over one notrump has a supposed advantage, you also need to revalue the question, whether it is really worthwhile to reserve a complete bid (3♣) and its continuations for that purpose over one notrump.

Sure. However, the common alternatives [5-5 minors weak, or 5-5 minors invitational] hardly seem to be making better use of the bid. Also, I think Puppet handles balanced slam-tries very well. In my experience, most methods do not cope well with 5m332 or (32)44 hands with slam interest.

Quote

Also you now get all sorts of information leakage.
For example you should then start to alert sequences like 1NT-2♣-2♦-3NT* saying to the opening leader something like: "Responder is likely to be either 4-4 or 4-2 in the majors to employ this sequence."
This might well influence the opening leader. Similar consideration apply when Puppet sequences are employed. I am uncertain how many Bridge players do this, though everybody claims to believe in full disclosure.

Sure, I do try to disclose this stuff properly. 1N:2C, 2D:3N as "denies precisely three cards in a major" is of marginal benefit to the opening leader IMO - much less so than 3NT promising 4-4 majors.

[Zelandakh]

Micky, you realise that using 2♣ as Puppet copes with (almost) all of the GF hands with 3-x, 4-x, 5-4 and 5-5 if you want it to, as well as invitational hands without a 5 card major? The sequence 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 2♥ copes with hands with 4 spades, simple NT invites, and Baron-style hands looking for a minor suit slam, while the sequence 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 3M handles (13)(45) hands. The key hand type that you cannot fit into this that regular Stayman handles are the 5+♣4M hands. I choose to pass these through 1NT - 2♠ (range ask or club transfer) and simply leave 3♣ natural, although other possibilities exist.

Whether this arrangement works better than the popular 2♣ Stayman, 3♣ Puppet seems to me to be partly dependant on how much importance you attach to the meaning of 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 2♥. As far as responding with 4-2 in the majors and a game-forcing hand, I cannot see any reason why you would prefer responding 3♣ over 2♣. The only disadvantage listed is giving away the information that Opener has 4 spades...but we only have 6 of them - this could easily be the best lead! Finally, I do not think the sequence 1NT - 3NT should deny a 3 card major playing Puppet. There are lots of hands with a 3 card major where not responding with Puppet makes sense.

[MickyB]

I've never been a fan of 2♣ puppet. IMO Stayman works very well on weak hands, and on hands that are just interested in game opposite a fit - 4441, (43)51, 5-4 majors, 5-5 majors. Also 5+ spade invites if you play 1N:2C, 2R:2S as this, and other 4M5+D hands if you play 1N:2C, 2X:3C as diamonds.

I agree that Stayman gives less info away than Puppet in this situation, but it gives more info away about declarer's hand, which may be significant during the play.

I agree it would be fairly unusual for 1N:3N to deny a three-card major! Obviously, this isn't the same as 1N:2C, 2D:3N denying a three-card major.

[Siegmund]

I've never been a fan of any kind of Puppet. There are an awful lot of auctions where it spews information it was intended to be concealing.

But this one seems exceptionally unnecessary in that regard.