[Vampyr]

Lovera, on 2015-June-19, 10:21, said:

The 2♣ Stayman, you surely know, allow to play in club when bidder repeat club -3♣(=weak)-

I'm afraid I didn't understand most of your post, but anyway this rather old-fashioned treatment has fallen out of favour.

Quote

than using 2♣ and together 2♦(=strong 11/+ p.) 2♠ is weak transfert and may be used how direct transfert for diamond suit.

It is very inefficient to use a bid as a weak-only transfer. The point of transfers is that responder gets another call, very often (as in this case) pass with a weak hand and something else with a strong hand.

[Lovera]

Vampyr, on 2015-June-19, 17:20, said:

I'm afraid I didn't understand most of your post, but anyway this rather old-fashioned treatment has fallen out of favour.



It is very inefficient to use a bid as a weak-only transfer. The point of transfers is that responder gets another call, very often (as in this case) pass with a weak hand and something else with a strong hand.

About first question i can agree and, if it is, you must read "if you use 2♣-2x, 3♣-to pass". Infact this using combined is particolar.
2♦ ambigoeus is a my idea explained in 2♦ Stayman where i remind you (see in BBO Forum event or clicking in this box on Lovera and visualizing my profile via "Find My Content"), bye.

[Zelandakh]

This is a hand type I needed to compromise on in my Puppet structure. Slammy minor 2-suiters are bid through 2♠ (range ask) folowed by 3♠. That will usually result in a worse position than alternatives. That said, the system uses a weak NT and this is a rare hand type in that context.

The actual hand would start with a 1♣ opening and then a 1♠ response is followed by 2♣ to show 15-17 balanced. Responder can now continue 2NT to show the minor 2-suiter.

To Lovera, you are running many more hand types through your Stayman response than a typical structure. It should be obvious to you that this will have knock-on effects. Sadly I don't find the idea interesting enough to work out where the problems lie - I will leave that to someone else. If you are genuinely interested in feedback I would suggest creating a new thread for it and giving the structure in detail.

[mcphee]

Lucky me uses 3D and both minors GF over which partner has an easy 3S bid as advanced cue bid for D. Assuming they bid 4D rather than 3S I would begin with 4H. Even the NT bidder could bid key card at this point but I can't see missing 6D with these cards.

[Zelandakh]

mcphee, on 2015-June-20, 04:46, said:

Lucky me uses 3D and both minors GF over which partner has an easy 3S bid as advanced cue bid for D.

What is your full schedule of advances here? I think I would want to play 3♠ as a diamond fit in a poor hand for slam (and 3♥ similarly for clubs) but perhaps you have something better.

Edit: LOL at myself - I see I already wrote something to this effect earlier in the thread.

[Lovera]

Vampyr says :"I'm afraid I didn't understand most of your post" than i try to explain. When partner bids 2♦ with this convention indicates this type of hand and relative range of force requiring stopper(s). Opener has a stopper in spade (AK) but not in heart and bid 2♠. If had have K♠ and A ♥ must bid 2♥(=only sure stopper in heart). With two stoppers in heart and spade instead 2NT. This information at second level, If seven tricks are available, allow to play 3NT otherwise starts searching for a minor suit to a game o slam. This Stayman conv. is not much known and that's why i have crossed it with transfert making 2♦ ambigueous, bye.