[PhilKing]

JLOGIC, on 2013-May-10, 18:29, said:

Losing 1N 2N invite hands is fine to me (in fact, that's basically how I prefer to play, I like 1N 2S clubs rather than range ask), but losing invites after staymaning is bad imo. There are a lot of 8 counts where you have to stayman because your hand is quite good opposite a 4-4 major suit fit (and even some 7 counts like xxx Kxxx x AT9xx imo). After you miss on the major suit fit you then have to bid 2N. Usually I think pass with 8 and bid 3N with 9 is fine so I'm fine losing 1N-2N hands, but these hands where you stayman need to be able to next bid 2N imo, forcing to game or passing 1N both seem like losing options.

You can play Stayman followed by 2NT as a semi-invite (accept only with the nuts), guaranteeing a 4-card major and a standard 8-count, but otherwise never invite. Deal?

[JLOGIC]

I think stayman and inviting in the major is also important oO.

And of course transferring and inviting for the same reason as stayman then invite. You can get around this with spades if you play 2C then 2S is invite, but for hearts you'd have to change your structure completely.

But yeah I do think of stayman then 2N as typically an 8 count with a 4 card major and bid accordingly when vul. With a 9 count I always bid game vul at imps (NV I don't but I guess that has more to do with my and my partners love of upgrading white). If I never upgraded then I would never invite with 9, that is actually how my father taught me bridge (always bid game with 9, always invite with 8, lol). Took me a while to unlearn the always invite with 8 part

Inviting when you might have a fit is a different beast than inviting when it's strictly a 1N or 2N or 3N hand. The 1N opener has a much wider range in terms of whether and how well it fits when 4M might be in the game and I think inviting is worthwhile in those cases.

[mike777]

mikestar13, on 2013-May-09, 16:25, said:

I've read about this style (Andrew Gumpers mentioned it in an article on Bridgewinners.com) and have been trying it in power no trump auctions. In response to a 1NT opening, if I want to play in no trump, I will pass or bid game. The auctions 1NT-2NT- P or 3NT not longer happen with us, we are either in a safe 1NT or playing 3NT: maybe with 23 points, maybe with 30. Really doesn't give the defense much help. This has proved a winner at IMPs, but is has been ok at matchpoints, surprisingly. Stealing 3NT gains only moderately over 2NT making on the nose or down one less than game--but it avoids the match point doubles of 1NT-2NT-3NT. Been thinking of using the same style to avoid 1M-2M-3M-P or 4M auctions, where making defense harder and avoiding doubles on bad trump splits may well pay even better. Love to hear pros and cons about this, especially from those of you who have used it and like it or have chosen to abandon it.

to be fair this has been discussed for years...many years here on the forums.


I think Justin has added an important exception regarding stayman auctions, aggressive stayman auctions that is worth further discussion. Does one simply bash to 3nt wllling to play 15 across from 8 or so?

[fromageGB]

For a long time I have played stayman followed by 2NT as always to play. This was developed because I live in a 12-14 world, where if your 1NT is 15+ you find that on the 15+ hands everyone else is finding the 2M/3M fits when partner does not have enough to invite. You need to be able to use stayman then stay in part score when there is no fit.

[aguahombre]

fromageGB, on 2013-May-11, 17:14, said:

For a long time I have played stayman followed by 2NT as always to play. This was developed because I live in a 12-14 world, where if your 1NT is 15+ you find that on the 15+ hands everyone else is finding the 2M/3M fits when partner does not have enough to invite. You need to be able to use stayman then stay in part score when there is no fit.

I am missing something, surely. It seems your field is weak NT oriented, and you are 15+. The field misses its 4-4 major fits on part-score deals, and you get to yours when they open 1NT and you don't. The weak NT opener occurs much more frequently than your strong one.

And, you are trying to eliminate the variance on the less frequent occasions at the risk of getting to the dreaded 2NT? 1NT might play as well or better some of the time when you are successful in finding the major suit fit.

[gnasher]

JLOGIC, on 2013-May-10, 20:50, said:

I think stayman and inviting in the major is also important oO.

Would you bid Stayman with Q1084 AJ97 7543 J ?

[fromageGB]

aguahombre, on 2013-May-11, 19:50, said:

I am missing something, surely. It seems your field is weak NT oriented, and you are 15+. The field misses its 4-4 major fits on part-score deals, and you get to yours when they open 1NT and you don't. The weak NT opener occurs much more frequently than your strong one.

And, you are trying to eliminate the variance on the less frequent occasions at the risk of getting to the dreaded 2NT? 1NT might play as well or better some of the time when you are successful in finding the major suit fit.

Yes, the field misses the 4-4 major fits when it is 12-14 opposite 10 max, and they play 1NT to my 2M. I have no problem with that.
I am talking about when it is 15+ and I open 1NT while they play in 2M. These are the times I want to bid 1NT 2♣ 2M pass, or 1NT 2♣ 2♦ 2NT pass, etc. Certainly the 12-14 occurs (beneficially) more often, but I want equality on the 15+ too, playing in 2M , or 2NT tick when others are in 1NT+1.

While 1NT making scores better than 2NT-1, 1NT making is a bottom compared with 2M making. A different story at IMP teams, of course. We do have insurance that Stayman then 2NT is 7 or 8 points, so 2NT usually has a play, but we concede potential defeat when responder is a 6 count. If responder is weaker than that, then we are usually OK because 1NT is usually as good (or bad) as 1suit passed out.

Edit >1NT might play as well or better some of the time when you are successful in finding the major suit fit.
Some of the time, but infrequently. Frequency is king, at matchpoints.

[aguahombre]

fromageGB, on 2013-May-12, 04:00, said:

Frequency is king, at matchpoints.

When you get to 2NT because there is no major fit, you lose or break even and leak information in the process ---add in the doubles of 2C which help the defense or get the opponents into the auction when they couldn't otherwise.

There would have to be an overwhelming probability that when responder holds a four-card major Opener will fit that same major in order for your strategy to gain ---results diluted slightly by the infrequent chances of 120 vs 110, or 90 vs-50.

[MickyB]

Also, some will reach the three-level on the 4-4 major fit [1m:1M, 3M:P, 1M:3M preemptive, 1M:2M and oppo protect etc], giving another way for 1NT to win matchpoints.

[JLOGIC]

gnasher, on 2013-May-12, 02:26, said:

Would you bid Stayman with Q1084 AJ97 7543 J ?

I'm sure I would...don't ask me what I'd do over 2D heh, but again too much potential for 4 of a major to pass imo.

[fromageGB]

aguahombre, on 2013-May-12, 04:38, said:

There would have to be an overwhelming probability that when responder holds a four-card major Opener will fit that same major in order for your strategy to gain ---results diluted slightly by the infrequent chances of 120 vs 110, or 90 vs-50.

I disagree with this. If opener fits the major, then we have not gained but broken even. I don't see a gain at all (compared to field) for stayman, but I do see a loss when there is a major fit if you don't stayman. This loss is bigger than the loss caused by using stayman in allowing them to double 2♣.

To quote the Pavlicek statistics (in the absence of any relevant to matchpoints), a 4-4 major beats 1NT three to one.

[MickyB]

Ok, so based on your assumptions -

Passing will average 25% when we miss our 4-4 fit and 50% when we don't.
Bidding will average 50% when we find our 4-4 fit.

I've not calculated the probability of a 4-4 major fit existing when we have one four-card major, but let's use 2/7 as our figure because it makes the numbers easy, it won't be far off IMO. This would mean that we'd need to score 40% on the boards where we bid Stayman and played in 2NT. That means that we'd have to make 8+ tricks 80% of the time [lol], before you even take into account information leakage.

Obviously there are massive flaws to this model, I'm just trying to show that your argument doesn't stack up. If you are so scared of playing 1N with a 4-4 major fit I'd look at Matchpoint Precision, Romex or similar.

[fromageGB]

MickyB, on 2013-May-12, 15:29, said:

Ok, so based on your assumptions ...

Thanks for this Micky. Making 2NT 80% of the time is breakeven, as you say, and this is maybe about right when you have a combined 22/23 hcp. I don't imagine it's worse than that, so the argument is valid (or, rather, not invalid). However, it does indicate that it's 50/50 whether I bid Stayman or not, so there probably is no point.

My gut feeling was overlooking the apparent fact that sometimes 2M and 2NT both make exactly, and on those hands playing 1NT wins. If this is 25% of the time, that levels the playing field. Don't put me down as a convert just yet, but I will try abandoning the Stayman with 7 or 8 hcp and see how it goes. Maybe as Chris Gibson wrote earlier in this topic, use Stayman then 2NT for a new specific purpose.