[BabsG]

Using the 2/1 system would it be feasible that 1NT (15-17) - 2C; 2NT could mean both 4-card majors with a maximum 17 count? I have no other use for a 2NT rebid by opener after Stayman. Just wondering. Thanks!

[P_Marlowe]

Yes.

2NT as showing 44 in the majors is part of the french response structure.
If you want to inccooperate min / max look out for Australian Stayman,
although here 2D (min) / 3D (max) is used to show 44 (diamonds are a
girls best friend), 2H (min) / 3H (max), 4 hearts no spades, ...,
2NT is min without any 4 card major, 3C is max without ...

It is playable, there is some add. information flow, but it is not that huge
compared to traditional responses.
The main restriction is, that it requires 2C to show inv.+ values, giving up
on garbage stayman.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: 15-17 is relevant, but 2/1 does not matter.

[ggwhiz]

I'm in ACBL land where 2nt bid in general does not (or should not) exist. Every time it happens against me it's followed by responder scratching their head for a couple of minutes.

I suggest that if you agree to play another method, which are legitimate as per P_Marlowe that the bid should be alerted but I'm not at all sure how this is handled where those bids are popular. I've given up asking the bids meaning on bbo as they are done on random shapes like 2-2-5-4.

[neilkaz]

2NT to show 4-4 majors is really part of SEF?

Anyhow, here in the US, I simply wouldn't dream to make that bid.

[BabsG]

 P_Marlowe, on 2017-March-23, 11:56, said:

Yes.

2NT as showing 44 in the majors is part of the french response structure.
If you want to inccooperate min / max look out for Australian Stayman,
although here 2D (min) / 3D (max) is used to show 44 (diamonds are a
girls best friend), 2H (min) / 3H (max), 4 hearts no spades, ...,
2NT is min without any 4 card major, 3C is max without ...

It is playable, there is some add. information flow, but it is not that huge
compared to traditional responses.
The main restriction is, that it requires 2C to show inv.+ values, giving up
on garbage stayman.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: 15-17 is relevant, but 2/1 does not matter.

Much appreciated Marlowe. I figured it must be incorporated in some system somewhere.

[johnu]

I can't see any advantage to showing the exact point count and your major suit distribution at the 2NT level for no apparent advantage.

I wouldn't agree to play this in a pickup partnership.

[P_Marlowe]

 neilkaz, on 2017-March-23, 12:56, said:

2NT to show 4-4 majors is really part of SEF?

Anyhow, here in the US, I simply wouldn't dream to make that bid.

At least it was.
A base version of the German standard system, was modelled after SEF,
+-, I lost track, but 2NT was a response showing both, and my take is,
that the origins were in SEF.
I am nearly certain, that 2NT is no longer part of the response structure
in thr German standard system, but I wont bet money on this.

[P_Marlowe]

 johnu, on 2017-March-23, 13:48, said:

I can't see any advantage to showing the exact point count and your major suit distribution at the 2NT level for no apparent advantage.

I wouldn't agree to play this in a pickup partnership.

If you have a bid by opener, to show 4-4, than responder can quickly
set trumps, in a forcing manner (3C / 3D) to start an auction
investigating slam.
In standard a 2H response, does not deny 4 spades, so if you have
a 4-4 fit in spades, it gets harder to set spade and start an auction
investigating slam. And ask peoble, if 2S denies 4 hearts, and they will
also start to squirm.
Similar min / max, if opener tells in one swoop, the auction wont tell
you, if game is thin or not, an important factor in deciding, what to
lead.

I am not advertising the method, just saying, there are some pros, which
may or may not be obvious, the cons I am leaving for other, I dont think,
that there are many on BBF speaking positive about those structures, i.e.
listing the pros is the harder part.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[BabsG]

I went to an expert on this one and got this reply:

That is a "treatment" that can be used in any system, whether 2/1 or SAYC or Goren or Precision or whatever. IMO that particular agreement is pointless. Responder already knows within a single point how big the NT hand is. What happens when Responder is 4=4=4=1 or 4=4=5=0 with basically a yarb (+) and is planning on passing any normal response to Stayman? Does Responder have to guess which major to play in at the three level, already too high, and from the wrong side? Should the partnership then use a rebid by Responder of 3m as something, perhaps to have Opener rebid a major? Much too convoluted.

Perhaps one could use that 2NT rebid as a special circumstance when having opened 1NT with a six card minor...but in that case an agreement could be made simply to rebid 3C/D after the Stayman inquiry...you can see how obscure these approaches could get, never mind how rare, how anti-KISS, and how much of a test on the memory.

I have seen auctions where the NT opener has rebid 2NT, and I roll my eyes every time.

My advice is to "fuggeddabouddit".

Thanks to all for input!

[aguahombre]

It shouldn't take an 'expert' to get people to read and comprehend the above... just someone with common sense who is articulate. You found him/her.

[ldrews]

We play a wide range NT, 11-15. The Australian Stayman looks like it might work very well for us, allowing us to split the range into two subranges on the rebid.

[mycroft]

I've seen this with EHAA extended stayman, where 2NT is "both majors, would refuse a NT invitation" and 3♣ is "both majors, would accept a NT invitation". But it's against a 10-12 NT, and you don't get Garbage Stayman. Of course, opposite a 10-12 NT, most Garbage Stayman hands are using their runout system after 1NT-X...

I wouldn't recommend this in general, as everybody else is saying. There are slight advantages in slam hands, but the ability to get out in 2x just comes up so much more often.

[Zelandakh]

 P_Marlowe, on 2017-March-23, 13:51, said:

At least it was.
A base version of the German standard system, was modelled after SEF,
+-, I lost track, but 2NT was a response showing both, and my take is,
that the origins were in SEF.
I am nearly certain, that 2NT is no longer part of the response structure
in thr German standard system, but I wont bet money on this.

The most recent file on the subject I can find at the DBV website is this 2012 summary by Dr Kaiser. The bottom of page 6 clearly states that the both majors 2NT response should still be used. If it has changed since then then the DBV is being slow in putting up a new document.

[Cyberyeti]

 ldrews, on 2017-March-23, 20:13, said:

We play a wide range NT, 11-15. The Australian Stayman looks like it might work very well for us, allowing us to split the range into two subranges on the rebid.

We used to play a wide range NT (10-15 1/2, 14-19 3/4), we split into 3 ranges with 4 card inv+ red suit transfers, this worked really well but took a lot of remembering.

[Zelandakh]

 Cyberyeti, on 2017-March-24, 06:17, said:

We used to play a wide range NT (10-15 1/2, 14-19 3/4), we split into 3 ranges with 4 card inv+ red suit transfers, this worked really well but took a lot of remembering.

You are vulnerable and Responder is 2434 with enough for game opposite a maximum (good 9/bad 10, say). Opener has a 4243 10 count on Hand 1 and a 3424 15 count on Hand 2. How does the bidding go for each?

[Cyberyeti]

 Zelandakh, on 2017-March-24, 07:41, said:

You are vulnerable and Responder is 2434 with enough for game opposite a maximum (good 9/bad 10, say). Opener has a 4243 10 count on Hand 1 and a 3424 15 count on Hand 2. How does the bidding go for each?

We would assume that 15 opposite good 9 bad 10 is not making game as we upgrade really good 15s, yes we very occasionally played 2N with 10 opposite 10 but it didn't happen often and made more often than it should. Actually we adjusted to 11-16 soon after and it had the major upside that we rebid 1N with 17-19 and played 1N where you were playing 2N fairly frequently. If I was doing it now, I would play a 5 point range rather than 6 because the difficulty is in the middle range where you're not GF opposite a minimum invite, but don't have the space that you do with the minimum range.

[jogs]

Your partner holding 4=4=4=1 with no HCPs would not be pleased hearing 2NT from you.

[Zelandakh]

 jogs, on 2017-March-24, 08:18, said:

Your partner holding 4=4=4=1 with no HCPs would not be pleased hearing 2NT from you.

If you are playing this method then Stayman promises constructive values, so that is hardly an issue is it?

[barmar]

 jogs, on 2017-March-24, 08:18, said:

Your partner holding 4=4=4=1 with no HCPs would not be pleased hearing 2NT from you.

If you're playing a system where opener can rebid 2NT, you have to give up on garbage Stayman. You pass with that hand and hope it's not too costly.

[helene_t]

 barmar, on 2017-March-24, 08:48, said:

If you're playing a system where opener can rebid 2NT, you have to give up on garbage Stayman. You pass with that hand and hope it's not too costly.

I'm not sure. When I'm weak and have a 3-suiter short in clubs (or length in both majors) partner is not so likely to have both majors, and even if he has, opps seem to have a good clubs fit so 3M may well be lawful.

I don't see what it accomplishes, though. If we want the 2♥ response to deny spades (this has some advantages if we play nonpromisory stayman) then it seems better to play 2N as min and (say) 3♣ as max.