[thebiker]

I am an EBU member playing in England

The majority of players use weak no trump (12-14 (Announceable)

and when they use Stayman 2C this is also announcable

The majority of players who use Stayman, use it as a means of finding a major suit fit on the way to making a Game Try or Bidding game

For this reason it seems practical in fourth seat to use Double as Lead Directing (Lead a club) rather than as a penalty double of a weak NT
The frequency of asking for a club lead must be much higher than holding a penalty double of a weak no trump, and seem to me a reasonable method when playing match points.

Of course a few players use Stayman on occasions to find a better spot at the two level in a major. But there is never any indication of the strength of the 2C bid on their card and sometimes it works for them.

A very small minority of players use some form of Garbage Stayman as a way of getting out of 1NT before it is doubled,

Its very rare that this is documented on their convention card (the default at club level appears to be these days to have as little as posible on a convention card and many do not even bother to have one.

My question is as follows:

If a pair are playing Garbage Stayman do the current EBU rules permit them to merely announce their partners 2C bid as Stayman?

If the answer is Yes - are they currently required to add a rider stating that the bid may be made on Garbage?

If the answer to this is NO, isnt there a case for changing the rules to make Garbage Stayman an ALertable convention?

If Garbage Stayman gets Alerted, it would give the opponents the opportunity to implement Double of 2C as a penalty double of 1NT which might prove very profitable when the right scenario turned up ( I agree that it could also be a disaster if the no trumper and their partner were on the way to game.

My point is that players are expected to reveal their agreements in most situations, and to disclose agreements that are unlikely to be mainstream.

Perhaps someone who is an EBU TD might give the offical line for the above situation.


I am interested in this area for two reasons:

(a) I Like to know what agreements and weapons the oppo have in their armoury

(b) I sometimes Garbarge Stayman without discussion with my partners as a way of running from 1NT before it is doubled
Of course once this becomes a regular occurence with any partner it becomes an agreement. Do you think that once that point is reached, we should do more than just announce 1NT 2C as Stayman

I sure that some players will say there is no need to do anything special - such methods are just part of the game, what is your view.

Thank you in advance of your input/opinions

Brian Keable alais "thebiker"

[PhilKing]

Responding 2♣ on a weak hand is as old as the convention itself. I don't see why it should be alertable. It's the way I was taught to play it by my parents when I was 16, and it seems pretty standard amongst anyone who has any clue whatsoever. It is particularly obvious to preescape with a bad hand when playing a weak no trump, so all you are announcing is that you know how to play bridge.

[Mbodell]

There is a forum for law questions where you can likely get a clear answer for EBU rules. My opinion, as just a general bridge person discussing it, is garbage stayman is stayman. Stayman is a relay bid asking opener to describe their shape. Period. You can have later rules with stayman. People have different follow ups for multiple sequences of stayman (for instance 2♣-2♠-4♦). The fact that 2♣-anything-pass is a perfectly fine thing to do on some hands seems fine. And for some of those people it is less about getting out of 1nt before doubled and more of just finding the right part score. If you are 4=4=5=0 the odds greatly favor finding a better 2 level fit than 1nt. That can be true even if you have a 9 count and aren't worried about a double. It can also be true when you have a 0 count. But the range for stayman is 0-27 or so, it isn't about saying a strength, it is about asking partner a question and taking control (I.e., a relay).

[1eyedjack]

 thebiker, on 2015-February-02, 17:42, said:

it seems practical in fourth seat to use Double as Lead Directing (Lead a club) rather than as a penalty double of a weak NT

It may be one of several practical uses of double, but in my experience most top pairs treat it as a penalty X of 1N. Happy to be corrected.

 thebiker, on 2015-February-02, 17:42, said:

The frequency of asking for a club lead must be much higher than holding a penalty double of a weak no trump, and seem to me a reasonable method when playing match points.

Agreed, it is a *reasonable* method. It may even be more frequent. But in order to assess the priority for use of a double we need to multiply the frequency by the cost of each occasion. If (and this is a BIG IF) doubling for a Club lead gains very little on each occasion that it arises, while doubling to show a strong hand gains a lot on each occasion, then within reason you can afford a lower frequency of the strong hand type and still justify using the double to show that hand. I grant that this is more significant at IMP than match points, and it is only the principle that I seek to establish. I make no comment on whether the numbers actually justify it. All that I have to go on is the popular usage by the expert community.

 thebiker, on 2015-February-02, 17:42, said:

A very small minority of players use some form of Garbage Stayman as a way of getting out of 1NT before it is doubled,

There may be regional variations but I think that your observation of the population is a bit off here. In my experience (also UK) some form of garbage is the norm, certainly with a weak major 2-suiter or 3-suited hand short in Clubs. Doing it on a random balanced hand is less frequent.

[gordontd]

 thebiker, on 2015-February-02, 17:42, said:

The majority of players who use Stayman, use it as a means of finding a major suit fit on the way to making a Game Try or Bidding game

<snip>

Of course a few players use Stayman on occasions to find a better spot at the two level in a major. But there is never any indication of the strength of the 2C bid on their card and sometimes it works for them.

A very small minority of players use some form of Garbage Stayman as a way of getting out of 1NT before it is doubled,

I'm amazed that in the land of the weak NT you say it's a "very small minority of players". I have the impression it's completely standard. Certainly when I used to teach beginners it was there in the lessons from the start.

 thebiker, on 2015-February-02, 17:42, said:

If a pair are playing Garbage Stayman do the current EBU rules permit them to merely announce their partners 2C bid as Stayman?

A method that asks for partner's four-card majors by bidding 2♣ in response to an opening 1NT is announced as Stayman. It does not have to promise anything - strength or majors.

[paulg]

 thebiker, on 2015-February-02, 17:42, said:

A very small minority of players use some form of Garbage Stayman as a way of getting out of 1NT before it is doubled,

In my experience it is the vast majority. The only people I recall playing who require some minimum values are actually playing some form of 5-card or Puppet Stayman, and even they should probably be playing Garbage

[helene_t]

In principle it is better to say what a bit shows than what it asks for. "Weak threesuited short in clubs or various invitational or stronger hands." One could add other weak options as appropriate. Apparently EBU has decided that this would be too much talking. The standard cc has a box for "non promissory" but that's a different issue.

If you agree with partner to play the double differently depending on the type of stayman opp play I suggest you ask at the beginning of the round rather than when it occurs. This is important because otherwise it may sound as if asking the question is a way to tell partner whether he should lead a club or not!

[FrancesHinden]

 thebiker, on 2015-February-02, 17:42, said:

I am an EBU member playing in England

The majority of players use weak no trump (12-14 (Announceable)

and when they use Stayman 2C this is also announcable

The majority of players who use Stayman, use it as a means of finding a major suit fit on the way to making a Game Try or Bidding game

Like other posters, I would have thought the opposite was true. Certainly when I was first taught Stayman, I was taught to bid 2C on (say) a 3451 0-count and pass the response; and to bid 2C on a very weak hand with 5-4 or 5-5 in the majors.
I play that 2C promises invitational+ values, and although we know that this is technically required, we often alert it (rather than announce it) because this is so unusual (and because it has some non-standard rebids from opener).

Some people also bid 2C on any random very weak hand, because they think it will be harder for the opponents to take a penalty - that's a good reason for playing double of 2C as a strong hand.

 thebiker, on 2015-February-02, 17:42, said:

My question is as follows:

If a pair are playing Garbage Stayman do the current EBU rules permit them to merely announce their partners 2C bid as Stayman?

If the answer is Yes - are they currently required to add a rider stating that the bid may be made on Garbage?

If the answer to this is NO, isnt there a case for changing the rules to make Garbage Stayman an ALertable convention?

My point is that players are expected to reveal their agreements in most situations, and to disclose agreements that are unlikely to be mainstream.

Perhaps someone who is an EBU TD might give the offical line for the above situation.

Brian Keable alais "thebiker"

Yes; No; Not that I can see
Where I disagree with your point is that I consider 'garbage' Stayman to be mainstream, certainly in England.

To address your final point - if you want an official answer, write to the EBU and ask for one. The chief TD (who has also posted to this thread) or the secretary to the Laws & Ethics Committee often get similar questions, and they will give you a properly official answer - after discussion with the L&E committee if the answer is not obvious.

[FrancesHinden]

 helene_t, on 2015-February-03, 02:06, said:

In principle it is better to say what a bit shows than what it asks for. "Weak threesuited short in clubs or various invitational or stronger hands." One could add other weak options as appropriate. Apparently EBU has decided that this would be too much talking.

While I agree with your point as a matter of theory (for reasons discussed elsewhere in the past), it is not practical for most asking bids. The way I was originally taught Stayman (the 'standard English Acol' version if you like) was that it included:
- invitational or stronger hands with 1 or 2 4-card majors
- weak hands with both majors, or weak 3-suiters, or a weak hand with long clubs
- slam try with one or two four card minors, with or without a 4-card major
- game forcing hand with 5-5 in the majors

So you would either have to say all of that, which takes a long time and doesn't really help the opponents (because they won't be able to take it all in); or you say 'artificial, may be weak, invitational, game forcing or stronger' in which case the concept of an announcement makes no sense, and you should just go back to alerting it. The idea of announcements is that they are used for calls where there is no risk of passing UI, and where a short description tells the opponents sufficient to know what to do.

Also, the idea of 'what it shows' rather than what it asks for gets a bit silly with calls such as blackwood. 1S - 3S - 4NT (alerted). What does that show? It shows that partner wants to know how many keycards I've got. No, what does is _show_? It shows a hand that believes it can take control of the auction, that has at least interest in slam and is prepared to drive the 5-level. That isn't exactly helpful, is it?

[Vampyr]

 helene_t, on 2015-February-03, 02:06, said:

In principle it is better to say what a bit shows than what it asks for. "Weak threesuited short in clubs or various invitational or stronger hands." One could add other weak options as appropriate. Apparently EBU has decided that this would be too much talking. The standard cc has a box for "non promissory" but that's a different issue.

If you agree with partner to play the double differently depending on the type of stayman opp play I suggest you ask at the beginning of the round rather than when it occurs. This is important because otherwise it may sound as if asking the question is a way to tell partner whether he should lead a club or not!

I have just looked at the latest version of the CC (online) and could not locate a box, just space for writing what a 2♣ response means.

I agree with your second paragraph.

[thebiker]

Thank you all for your replies and input

(1) I was not surprised that no one thought there was anything wrong with announcing Stayman however it was played. Thank you Gordon for your confirmation of this.

(2) I have to disagree with the majority view that Garbage Stayman is virtually Universal in England

At the higher levels of the game and in the major bridge communities that is very probably the case, but not by the vast number of ordinary players playing in the byways of small clubs in small counties such as Bedfordshire and other places
The replies were all made by people playing at a high level and are not representative of the total bridge population


In a recent partnership with a Cambridge graduate who learned his bridge in Yorkshire (Sheffield) and was at one point involved with the Junior traing program circa 2000 - my partner was amazed when I used a form of Garbage Stayman to wriggle out of a potential double of his 1NT opener.It was completely off his radar.


(3) I agree that asking after a 2C bid has been made - could be taken as UI for partner, and I dont do that. Nor is it practical to ask every pair prior to play commencing about how they play Stayman, and as I said in the original post very few players actually produce convention cards these days
This practice might not be best playing in a long match, where it is possible to ask a few questions prior to play commencing.


It seems to me that the best method of defending against 1NT 2C is as follows

(a) Playing MP's at club level, assume that the majority of players dont use Garbage Stayman, and then it double can be used for some purpose other than showing penalty values versus a weak 1NT

(b) Playing teams (particularly again good players) just play double as Penalty of 1NT, which may help prevent one being shafted by the more knowledgeable/devious players.


best regards

Brian Keable alias "thebiker"

[WellSpyder]

No doubt I will not be regarded as representative of club-level bridge in England either, but I do play a reasonable amount of bridge at club level and I don't think garbage Stayman would come as a surprise to anyone I play against. It might not necessarily occur to them to make the bid themselves, but I don't think anyone has ever made the assumption that a Stayman bidder must have invitational values. If nothing else, many club players probably assume as a matter of course that 2C in response to 1N followed by 3C simply shows a hand that wants to play in 3C.....

[paulg]

 thebiker, on 2015-February-03, 05:29, said:

At the higher levels of the game and in the major bridge communities that is very probably the case, but not by the vast number of ordinary players playing in the byways of small clubs in small counties such as Bedfordshire and other places

I doubt that any of us would agree except in small enclaves, where it just sounds like a NFN situation.

[thebiker]

I doubt that any of us would agree except in small enclaves, where it just sounds like a NFN situation

To Paulg

It would be helpful to know exactly what an NFN situation is?

I dont expect everyone to agree with me - but if you find it necessary to comment on my views it might be considered more polite for you to comment in English rather than in abbreviated capitial letters which may not be understood by everyone.

Brian Keable

[gordontd]

 thebiker, on 2015-February-03, 06:52, said:

I doubt that any of us would agree except in small enclaves, where it just sounds like a NFN situation

To Paulg

It would be helpful to know exactly what an NFN situation is?

I dont expect everyone to agree with me - but if you find it necessary to comment on my views it might be considered more polite for you to comment in English rather than in abbreviated capitial letters which may not be understood by everyone.

Brian Keable

He provided a hyperlink.

[thebiker]

Hi Paulg

NFN = Normal for Norfolk

I take back my initial comments on my answers

I was born in Suffolk and yes it is vaguely funny

regards

Brian Keable

PS Beware the Iceni/ISIS visiting Scotland

[paulg]

 thebiker, on 2015-February-03, 07:26, said:

NFN = Normal for Norfolk

Popularised, to no small extent, by Stephen Fry on QI. Fry grew up in Norfolk and also considered it apt.

[NickRW]

I too was born in Suffolk. I must leap to the defence of my intellectually challenged neighbours

[mycroft]

Heh, I pulled off a garbage Keri before. As long as it's described as "wants to play 2♦" rather than "has diamonds", I was good :-)

I like vs a weak NT a cards double of 2♣. Mostly because I never have the hand that wants to double. Correction: I never have the hand that wants to double and can survive a redouble.

[jallerton]

 paulg, on 2015-February-03, 08:11, said:

Popularised, to no small extent, by Stephen Fry on QI. Fry grew up in Norfolk and also considered it apt.

and in bridge forum circles, popularised by Cyberyeti.