[FrancesHinden]

I've played 2NT-3NT as artificial for years. It's not really a question of what I happen to use it for (a club slam try, as it happens) but rather as Andy and others have said, so that I can get everything I want to into the response structure to 2NT. One thing we do think is important is that we have two different ways to get to 3NT after a 2NT opening - either by 3S (diamond slam try or to play in 3NT) or via 3C. That gives some control over what suit RHO might double.

The estimate that this costs "1 imp per board" looks crazy to me. Given that we never forget it (and we have never forgotten it) it makes no difference nearly all the time, some of the rest of the time we bid a good slam that we wouldn't otherwise have done, sometimes it gets them off to the wrong lead, sometimes they go for a penalty (a +960 not that long ago springs to mind) and yes, every now and again, it gets them off to a better lead against our final contract.

[mgoetze]

Frances, would you mind posting at least your direct responses to 2NT? The more detail you are willing to provide the better of course.

[ArtK78]

With one partner I play 4 suit transfers over 2NT. We have to go through Puppet Stayman to get to 3NT if we have no slam interest.

This has its plusses and minuses, but we have not had any real problems with it.

[steve2005]

If one is using puppet styman doesnt the number of hands you would bid 2N-3NT go down considerably?
Then it would make some sense to use a gadget in 3NT.

[bluecalm]

Quote

The estimate that this costs "1 imp per board" looks crazy to me

I was referring to 3C/3S sequence which gives chance to double two suits on the way to 3N.
My estimation of cost of 3S = transfer to 3N as the way to get to 3nt is 0.5/0.6imp per board and about 12-15 tricks per 100 hand on opening lead at matchpoints.
I admit those are very quick estimations but I would be very surprised if they were way off, the way those things work in my view.

Quote

it makes no difference nearly all the time

Well.. yeah. Notice that let's say 5 out of 100 hands when they defeat your 3N when they otherwise wouldn't is already 0.5imp/hand but all you could intuitively say from experience is exactly what's in the quote above.

[benlessard]

The lead director X is a loss but nothing compared to the cost of playing transfers/2S range check in a weak NT setup, yet nobody are really worried about those. If youre worried when it goes 2nt--3nt and think that partner may have forgotten it, then dont play it otherwise I like to have more space.

Maybe using 3NT as non forcing but showing a certain type of hand (like 33 in both M or 3433/4333 that doesnt really want to go through stayman) make sense

[bluecalm]

Quote

The lead director X is a loss but nothing compared to the cost of playing transfers/2S range check in a weak NT setup, yet nobody are really worried about those.

This is wrong.
First, many people are worried about it hence increasing popularity of 1N - 2N = invite, at least among people I play with.
Second, doubling 2S is not nearly as lucrative because they could redouble you occasionally and more importantly they have room to check for stoppers/run to some other spot. At 3S level the only thing they can do is to bid 3N and pray.

Quote

Maybe using 3NT as non forcing but showing a certain type of hand (like 33 in both M or 3433/4333 that doesnt really want to go through stayman) make sense

My view is that say 3-2-5-3 hands don't want go through stayman either. I think it's not close and bidding stayman with such hands is auto destruction in pure form, especially if you usual sequence will be: 3C - 3H - 3S - 3N.

[benlessard]

Quote

My estimation of cost of 3S = transfer to 3N as the way to get to 3nt is 0.5/0.6imp per board

I think your estimates are off. IMO most case of doubling 3S are long spades and side entries, on those they would lead spades most of the times anyway (lead from a short M when your broke) and if you double with a chubby 4 card you risk getting a XX since many open 2NT with a 5M. Also because of the double, sometimes they will play 4H/5m making rather than 3Nt going down.

At MP i agree that the double is a bit painful.

Quote

yet nobody are really worried about those.

I should have put ...yet most players arent really worried about those (not my case be the way, since im a believer of non transfers over a weak NT)

[bluecalm]

Quote

I think your estimates are off.

And you based that on what ?

Just to start the ball rolling with some numbers. Let's pick perfect hand for puppet stayman:
J65 98 KJ654 976

It's perfect because it's weak, the stronger the hand the difference between 4S and 3N is smaller.
According to dd simuls this hand make 4S whooping 17% more often than 3N opposite 5 spades. In practice 3N will score a bit better because 1st lead is much bigger factor against NT contracts but let's forget about it for a while.
17% is 1.7imp/board. How often do you find 5 spades in opener hand ? The answer to that according to my quick simul is 8/100 which means that by having puppet stayman in your arsenal you gain 13.6imp per 100 hand. Now, there are 88 hands left when you land in 3N anyway. If they beat you just 2 times when they otherwise wouldn't you are worse off.
If you are going to just deny my estimations there is no way I convince you or that I argue with you further about it. I am sure though that for anyone willing to make an effort of going through dealt hands it will be completely obvious that 2 out 88 is way below what they actually gain from being able to double your 3C and subsequent 3S bid in some auctions (supposedly after 3H denying majors and 3S as transfer to 3N).

And all that is for perfect hand for puppet. Don't forget all the usual hands when you are donating imps by introducing 3S = transfer to 3N as consequence of puppet.

[mgoetze]

bluecalm, on 2012-March-16, 17:10, said:

which means that by having puppet stayman in your arsenal

Are you sure you're in the right thread?

[bluecalm]

I got confused.. but yeah.. this is the right thread as I was responding to benlessard's:

Quote

Maybe using 3NT as non forcing but showing a certain type of hand (like 33 in both M or 3433/4333 that doesnt really want to go through stayman) make sense

Which is to say this is wrong idea as hands which really doesn't want to bid puppet (or 3S) are very frequent and not only consist of some 4-3-3-3's and such.

[Flameous]

I played 2NT - 3NT as 5♠4♥ once before I was introduced to Muppet stayman, since then I've had no need.

I do play 2NT - 3♣ - 3♥ - 3♠ as puppet to 3NT and 3NT as showing 5♠4♥.

And for bluecalm's comfort, I only use Muppet stayman when I hold 4 card major. (3361 is exception of course) It's not a tool to look for unlikely 5-3 fits but a more precise tool for opener to show shape and diagnose those 5-4 fits.

[johnu]

I'm in the 2NT-3NT artificial camp. 2NT openings take up valuable bidding space, bidding decisions are normally going to be game or slam oriented, so as long as you are playing some kind of reasonably thought out system, the extra sequence provided could be critical to getting to the right denomination and the right level.

For those worried about the lead directing problem with 2NT - 3♠, how many play 1NT - 2NT as natural and use a Stayman sequence to invite to 2NT? The lead directing and shape information given by the invitational Stayman sequence have been considered and deemed an acceptable loss for the use of 2NT for some other purpose (at least by the theorists who play it). The loss of an entire round of bidding by opening 2NT tilts the scales to using 3NT as a multi-way bid for me.

My preferred system:

2NT - 3♠ Relay to 3NT
3NT - 4♣ Confi
.......4♦ Super Confi
.......4♥ Heart fragment, 5-5 or better in the minors
.......4♠ Spade fragment, 5-5 or better in the minors
.......4NT 1=1=5=6, 5-6 in the minors

Confi and Super Confi are used with balanced or semi-balanced slam+ range hands and can also have 4 or 5 card spade suits so a lead directing double of 3♠ is more likely to end in 3♠XX than usual.

For those worried about forgetting their system, play 3NT to play or spend the time practicing so you remember. Do you ever add a new convention/treatment without practicing?

[bluecalm]

Meh.
You are all wrong and it will be obvious once computers are better than humans at bridge and could solve such problems leaving no doubts. I am writing this to quote myself in 10 years.
Gl playing your puppets and transfers to 3N

[kgr]

In Niemeyer 2NT-3NT is 4c♥ and 5c♠.
I have played that, but 3NT sounds to natural and easy to forget.

[Phil]

There's a world of difference between an artificial call at the two level getting doubled and an artificial call at the three level getting doubled. At the two level, you need a reason for the lead, as well as length to pull this off which reduces the frequency. Furthermore, when an artificial call doesn't get doubled, partner doesn't have the same reliable negative inference regarding a pass.

After 2N - 3♠, responder doesn't have spades, so a double is pretty safe with nearly any four card suit where we want the lead. At matchpoints, playing this method is borderline silly, considering the frequency of 2N - 3N plop. Even at teams I would want to see some hard evidence that the slams and better games we get to outweigh the lead considerations. I suppose someone of Frances and her partners caliber will not forget this treatment, but it seems outright dangerous for anyone below the elite level, and a single incident where a game or slam is lost because of the lapse takes years of good results to equalize it.

[Vampyr]

Flameous, on 2012-March-16, 17:55, said:

I do play 2NT - 3♣ - 3♥ - 3♠ as puppet to 3NT and 3NT as showing 5♠4♥.

Why not reverse these? This is how I play. Now you give them one less suit to double.

[benlessard]

Quote

17% is 1.7imp/board. How often do you find 5 spades in opener hand ? The answer to that according to my quick simul is 8/100 which means that by having puppet stayman in your arsenal you gain 13.6imp per 100 hand. Now, there are 88 hands left when you land in 3N anyway. If they beat you just 2 times when they otherwise wouldn't you are worse off.

Thanks now I know why your estimation are off.

[MickyB]

Vampyr, on 2012-March-17, 12:05, said:

Why not reverse these? This is how I play. Now you give them one less suit to double.

Presumably to avoid wrong-siding 4♠. I thought the whole point of Muppet was that 5♠3♥ starts with 3♣?

[Vampyr]

MickyB, on 2012-March-17, 12:11, said:

Presumably to avoid wrong-siding 4♠. I thought the whole point of Muppet was that 5♠3♥ starts with 3♣?

Oh, OK. I didn't think of that, since I play Kokish, so with the most common range (20-b22) 4♠ is already wrongsided.