[Dinarius]

---

For example, how would you explore for slam with this hand opposite a 15-17 1NT opening?

Can 3♥ or 3♠ be used to show at least 5/5 in the minors and game-forcing? (If not, what do you use these bids for?) Opener could retreat to 3NT with no interest (e.g. minimum and 4432, for example).

But, I'm interested to hear what others bid.

Thanks.

D.

[DavidKok]

It's rare enough I wouldn't worry too much about it. One possible solution is to transfer to clubs and then bid diamonds (or transfer to clubs and then show the heart shortness, backing into diamonds if partner signs off). Personally I use the jumps to 3M as (31)(54) GF (bid the singleton, though I've heard people say that bidding the 3-card suit might be better). Note that this has consequences for transfer-to-a-minor-then-show-shortness, as it's no longer a 5431 type hand (and more usually is 6331 or 6m4om21).

If you do not play transfers to minor suits (not even through 2♠ range ask) this is going to be difficult to show.

Incidentally over a 2NT opening I use 3♠ as this type of hand - GF with both minor suits. It's funny that it's more of an issue over 1NT than over 2NT.

[Cyberyeti]

We don't play 4 suit transfers, so ours go thru 2♠ along with weak options, partner breaks with 4 diamonds or 5 clubs, if he doesn't, we can bid 3N NF 5-5 but still SI with this

[Stephen Tu]

Most common these days I see 1nt-3d to show this sort of hand, when playing 4-way transfers using up the 2s/2nt responses. Unfortunately there aren't standardized followups to 3d.

1nt-2s as minor suit stayman (followed by 3H on your example hand to show 55 with a stiff heart) used to be more common. Certainly 1nt-3H could conceivably show the same thing, with whatever you now used 1nt-3h for moved into a different bid.

[Dinarius]

After 3D showing at least 5/5 in the minors, what about 3❤️/3♠️ now by opener to set clubs/diamonds respectively, and 3NT to show minimum and the likes of 4432?

D.

[mw64ahw]

I have played around with a 1NT structure that includes 3 ways to show/explore the slam try:
a) Transfer to ♣ via 2♠ - if super accepted then 4♣ is a slam try
b) Transfer to ♣ and bid 3♦ - 3♥ then asks whether xx46 or xx55 - xx55 is then 3NT Pass/Correct or 4♣ minor suit slam try
c) Start off with a Puppet Stayman version and over 2♦, 3♣ can be a minor suit slam try played out similarly to the Puppet Stayman version I use.

[Stephen Tu]

Dinarius, on 2023-May-12, 09:45, said:

After 3D showing at least 5/5 in the minors, what about 3❤️/3♠️ now by opener to set clubs/diamonds respectively, and 3NT to show minimum and the likes of 4432?

D.

I've seen this suggested before, but I don't think the early cheap trump setting is of much value. I'd rather have some scheme that helps opener evaluate vs responder's stiff or not to see whether they have too much wasted opposite that, to still get back to 3nt despite having a decent fit, when you have secure double stop and too many wasted values. So shortness asking, or maybe showing wastage opposite a stiff, or denying wastage opposite a stiff, etc.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,
there are schemes, that use 2NT as 55 in the minor, to free up the natural meaning, invite without
a 4 card major into the hands, that use 2C Stayman.

The consequence is, that 2S in the seq.
1NT - 2C
2H - 2S

has to show 4 spades and inv.+ strength, and the NT opener needs to start with hearts, if he happens
to have 4-4.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Gilithin]

Here are some options for you:-

1. Traditional: if you go back far enough into history, there is a time where the popular way of bidding this hand would have been 2♣ followed by 3♦ and 4♣. It does gets the message across but at a big cost of space, arriving at the 4 level without an agreed fit.
2. Baron: Another ancient idea, Baron is using a 2♠ response to initiate bidding 4 card suits up-the-line in a slam-interested, usually in combination with a simple range ask for invites. If Responder then bids a minor at the 4 level, it shows a 5th card in that suit. Probably slightly better than #1 but still pretty dire.
3. Minor Suit Stayman: Probably the best of the older schemes at handling this hand type, MSS uses a 2♠ response to ask Opener about their minors. After Opener bids 2NT (denying a 4 card minor) a 3♥ rebid would show a shortage. This is great when you have the hand for it but does use up one of our most useful calls for something relatively uncommon.
4. Specialised: A convention you sometimes see on cards is for an immediate 3♦ response to show 5-5 minors and GF. I have yet to be convinced that this is a good use of bidding space but if that is your system hole, why not?
5. Simple 4-way: A very popular way of playing full minor suit transfers is for a 2NT response to ask Opener to show their better minor. You can raise this to 4 (or bid 4♥ if that is played as a splinter) to show slam interest.
6. Splinter: Speaking of splinters, another very popular method amongst expert pairs is for an immediate 3M response to show shortage in that major and fewer than 4 in the other. This method improves on the previous one by allowing a stop in 3NT when the hands fit badly. In effect it reaches a similar point to #3 without giving up the useful 2♠ response to a relatively rare hand type.
7. Multi-suit xfers: One method I used to see posted on here a lot is to use the minor suit transfers to show 2-suited hands rather than the more popular one-suited schemes. If you do that then you can show clubs and then diamonds below 3NT (either "naturally" via 1NT - 2♠ -- 2NT/3♣ - 3♦ or (actually better) using second round transfers, meaning that the last bid is 3♠. This does allow a stop in 3NT but without the critical splinter information, so is better suited to hands with serious slam interest rather than just some slam interest.

Even posting 7 options is just skimming the surface here. There are so many 1NT structures out there and many different ways of handling hands of this type. In an ideal world you will actually have multiple options to choose from, depending on how much slam interest you have. An optimal scheme probably includes both #6 and your choice from #4, #5 or #7. If you can make a scheme with #3 work that is also fine but you usually end up having to give up something more important to include it.