[dickiegera]

---

! NT is 15-17
2♣ is stayman
2♦ is natural

We play 2/1

What should 3♦ be?

[MrAce]

If it came at the table and I did not have an agreement, I would take it as an attempt to make pd declarer. With a hand like 4-4 majors and xx(x) diamonds that would accept an invitation. (In case pd has Kx ♦ or w/e)

[The_Badger]

hi Richard (dickiegera),

I, too, believe it is (without agreement) showing a similar hand to the one Timo (MrAce) says, but could as a result of South's bid - and South being under the NT opener - enhanced West's hand slightly (which I believe would have to be absolutely maximum NT opener to make the 3♦ bid.)

As both the normal 2♥ or 2♠ bids have been bypassed, maybe West was concerned with the possible bidding sequence.

1NT - pass - 2♣ - 2♦ -
2♥/2♠ - 3♦ - ???

By bidding 3♦ immediately himself, he is taking all the pressure off of himself and partner. ( Except his partner interpreting the 3♦ bid correctly )

[GrahamJson]

It means "you make the final mistake partner". Making bids such as this with a partner with whom you have no clear agreements is asking for trouble. As others have said, it should probably be a maximum with 44 in the majors. However after you've bid 4H I can envisage dummy going down with something like 3325 and no diamond stop ("I would have bid 2H if I had the majors, I was asking for a diamond stop"). One thing is for sure, it means whatever partner intended it to mean, whether it makes sense or not. I've seen many times players on BBO making "clever" bids and then blaming partners when it all goes horribly wrong. Even worse, they frequently then ask for a redeal, having landed in a 42 fit or some similar disaster.

[fazzzoola]

 dickiegera, on 2016-July-28, 17:05, said:

---

! NT is 15-17
2♣ is stayman
2♦ is natural

We play 2/1

What should 3♦ be?


For 25 cents I'd venture a guess... For $1 I'd include this in an article about worst bids in bridge. LOL West might as well play 2 under 1 instead.

[Zelandakh]

You write "2♣ is Stayman" but this has different meanings in different parts of the world. Does it promise any values? Promise a major? Was 3♦ a possible response without the 2♦ overcall? If the answers to all of these are "No" then I would suggest that a 3♦ rebid is basically impossible here.

[helene_t]

If you play promissory stayman it shows 4-4 majors. If nonprimisory probably the same.

[Caitlynne]

3D, without an agreement firmly in place, is not defined in the Stayman convention. Therefore, any player that makes this bid has announced that he/she either:
A. is an idiot
B. is a mastermind who has no respect for partnership

When this kind of bid situation occurs, I follow the rule that - if the bid could be natural - it is to be treated as natural. Hence I would assume that opener elected to open 1NT holding a 6 card diamond suit with a 6322 pattern.

What's more, unless I had game forcing values, I would always Pass 3D, hoping to have partner play there. After all, that is what a mastermind partner wants ... and alternately, if partner is an idiot, it is what an idiot partner deserves.

[ahydra]

 Caitlynne, on 2016-July-29, 12:36, said:

3D, without an agreement firmly in place, is not defined in the Stayman convention. Therefore, any player that makes this bid has announced that he/she either:
A. is an idiot
B. is a mastermind who has no respect for partnership

When this kind of bid situation occurs, I follow the rule that - if the bid could be natural - it is to be treated as natural. Hence I would assume that opener elected to open 1NT holding a 6 card diamond suit with a 6322 pattern.

What's more, unless I had game forcing values, I would always Pass 3D, hoping to have partner play there. After all, that is what a mastermind partner wants ... and alternately, if partner is an idiot, it is what an idiot partner deserves.

This feels like a 99% unnecessarily aggressive, 1% constructive post. OK, so it's not a good idea to make undiscussed bids and it's a reasonable treatment to say "if it could be natural, then it is". But you can't have an agreement for EVERY auction; it feels very harsh to call anyone who pushes the boundaries of agreements just slightly when their hand warrants it an "idiot" who isn't deserving of their partner.

Here South has overcalled with 2D so the odds of you wanting to play in 3D - in a 6-1 fit facing a 5-1 break if you're lucky? - are slim to none. (Furthermore, presumably X would be penalty interest, given that you could just bid a major or pass otherwise?)

[Edit: Just seen the OP provided a hand as well, with three diamonds. So if West has 6 of them and South 5+, there are least fourteen in the pack...]

The bid either has to mean

1) MAX, no major, no diamond stop - and only if you don't play garbage stayman. The idea being that pass would show the same hand but minimum, while with a MAX you want to force to game.
2) 4/4 majors

and I think the second meaning is the more practical of these by far, so though it would take me a bit of thought to get there, that's what I would reason at the table.

ahydra

[Winstonm]

Has to mean fit for either major and a maximum.

[ggwhiz]

Since partner has both majors but prefers that I declare, I take it as a compliment to my card play.

Rare though it is, as in never before

[msjennifer]

The 3D bid shows a fit for both majors,maximum hand and no wastage in diamond suit.It asks responder to bid his major suit.There can occur certain responding hands where the responder can toss it back to opener by bidding 4D.After all, if non vul.,the opponent bidding 2 D may be putting a spanner in the works.I shall bid only 3H with the present hand.There are responder hands where with the information given by the 3D bid ,can make it easier to bid even a slam in a major suit.And why not?
As regards the statements made by Caitlynne,the less said the better.

[dickiegera]

 msjennifer, on 2016-July-30, 00:58, said:

The 3D bid shows a fit for both majors,maximum hand and no wastage in diamond suit.It asks responder to bid his major suit.There can occur certain responding hands where the responder can toss it back to opener by bidding 4D.After all, if non vul.,the opponent bidding 2 D may be putting a spanner in the works.I shall bid only 3H with the present hand.There are responder hands where with the information given by the 3D bid ,can make it easier to bid even a slam in a major suit.And why not?
As regards the statements made by Caitlynne,the less said the better.

---

This was West hand and I gather that it does not qualify for a 3♦bid

[helene_t]

 dickiegera, on 2016-July-30, 06:55, said:

---

This was West hand and I gather that it does not qualify for a 3♦bid

If you play promisory stayman then it does qualify in my opinion. Why not? You may have a diamond stopper but given the known major suit fit, the stopper is irrelevant, and besides you want partner to declare. He could have the queen or even the Jack. And it is more difficult South to decide whether to lead a diamond or not than it is for North.

You may not have a maximum and that is a problem if you play nonpromisory stayman.

Basically, you should always try to make responder declare, regardless of your diamond holding. What about something like:

pass=no 4-card major
dbl=4 hearts, not four spades, some interest in defence
2♥=spades, not hearts
2♠=hearts but not spades, not so suitable for defense, OR minimum with six clubs
2NT=long clubs, maximum or maybe it shows clubs plus a diamond stopper?
3♣=maybe five hearts?
3♦=both majors

[Winstonm]

If the meaning of 2C is forcing Stayman, then 3D can take on different meanings.

[msjennifer]

I have serious doubts that, anywhere except club standard noncompetitive game,Stayman is played as game forcing.Even Beginners now know extended Stayman and other bids.Since Stayman is also used with weak hands,the No trump openers hand described by dickiegera is not at all suitable for a 3D bid.I will expect a hand like KQxx,AQxx,xx,AQx ,for a 3D bid.It is normally, and I repeat normally,the intention of Stayman to make the no trump hand the declarer.In fact, that's why the transfer bids are used.And that is why I beg to differ with The Abbess.I do not like to suppress a 5 card major in favor of a NT unless the suit is weak and there are tenaces in the other suits which require to be protected.