[wyman]

 ArtK78, on 2012-February-10, 13:10, said:

With my usual partner, we play 4-suit transfers over 2NT. So, with 4 hearts and 6 diamonds we would transfer to diamonds and then bid hearts.

Maybe we should take this offline since it's going beyond the scope of this discussion, but can you still bid hearts naturally if pard superaccepts in diamonds?

[phil_20686]

I think its fairly standard if you play normal stayman that bidding the other major should show a slam try in partners major. So 2N-3c-3h-3s or 2n-3c-3s-4h, if you play non promissary stayman you cannot do that as you need 2n-3c-3h-3s to show 4s, since 2n-3c-3h-3N could have no four card major, but its quite non standard to play non promissory stayman over a 2N opener.

I think this hand has a routine slam try by bidding 4H. You have few controls, but if partner is a maximum you have a combined 33 with a 4-4 fit and a side five card suit, which gives you the potential for plenty of tricks. A hand like AKxx AKx Axx KQx makes slam really pretty good, and it could be better.

If you have 2n-3d-3h-3s available to show a hand that is 45 and slammish that would be great, but I don't know anyone who uses that sequence for 45 hands, most play some version of smolen, and use that sequence for something different. Most advanced players will have a series of agreements on transfer breaks. For me partner will break on Hxx or better, so if I choose this route I run the risk of missing a 4-4 spade fit to play in a 53 heart fit. This type of issue is common in cramped auctions after a 2N opener. For me, then, this auction would show 46, and I put the 55 hands through smolen continuations, with 2n-3c-3d-4h = 55 no slam interest, and 2n-3c-3d-3h-X-4h = 55 slam interest.

[Antrax]

Okay, first of all some explanation of "the system":
a) 3♣ was indeed Stayman, I thought that's obvious from my comments. At the table I thought it was puppet and partner didn't, but that's irrelevant to the question.
b) As others mentioned, bidding the other major after opener replies with a major to Stayman shows acceptance for that major and slam interest.
c) I didn't say this is a Smolen sequence, I said my plan was to reach at least 4M by starting with stayman (assuming I knew it's not puppet) and then over 3♦, bidding 3♠. Not sure why it's considered an advanced convention, it's a rather simple one unless it has other aspects I'm missing. Anyway, I didn't even consider the idea of transferring to hearts, because in my hand "5/4 Majors and GF -> Smolen, start with stayman". So thanks for the suggestion.

Now, about the actual judgment. As you may have guessed, I bid 4♥ SI and we found an unbeatable 6♠, and were the only pair to do so. I tried to apply the "perfect minimum" here, so I gave partner a 22-count that looks like this:
♠AKxx ♥AKx ♦Axxx ♣Ax

This makes 6 whenever spades are 3-2 and can make on some 4-1s assuming the long hand has at least two hearts, and probably other cases I didn't consider.
Does "perfect minimum" not apply here? Did I abuse it somehow, i.e. I only get to place HCP but the shape makes this worth extra? For that case, is AKxxx AKx Axx Ax a legitimate "perfect" minimal holding?

BTW, kudos phil, move one x from diamonds to clubs and this was partner's hand

[TWO4BRIDGE]

 phil_20686, on 2012-February-10, 14:35, said:

I think its fairly standard if you play normal stayman that bidding the other major should show a slam try in partners major. So 2N-3c-3h-3s or 2n-3c-3s-4h.....

I think you have given me a solution to a Side Issue:

wyman ( post # 16 ) had asked how Responder can show a 4M/6m GF, slammish hand.
You can easily show it for the following when Opener has NO 4 card Major:
2NT - 3C ( regular Stayman )
3D! ( no 4 card M ) - 4m ( 4M/6m )

But I always wondered about the case when Opener HAS a 4 card Major:
2NT - 3C
3M - 4m ( I didn't know if this is a cuebid agreeing M or 4oM/6m; where 4oM = 4 cards other major )

But phil_20686 says he uses the following to "agree M, slammish" :
2NT - 3C
??
..3H - 3S! = artificial, agree ♥ , slammish
or
..3S - 4H! = artificial, agree ♠ , slammish

That being the case will free up the 4m bid to show the 4oM/6m hand .

[Antrax]

I'm still interested in this, BTW. The answer "no" was pretty unanimous, but what is the guiding principal? My "pro" column has we could have as much as 31 HCP and a perfect minimum is enough for slam. What are the cons to balance this?

[BunnyGo]

 Antrax, on 2012-February-12, 09:15, said:

I'm still interested in this, BTW. The answer "no" was pretty unanimous, but what is the guiding principal? My "pro" column has we could have as much as 31 HCP and a perfect minimum is enough for slam. What are the cons to balance this?

The thing that many people said to balance this is that 31 HCP with all Aces and Kings is not their definition of a "perfect minimum" since it is so control heavy, and controls are really the key to slams. I have to think about this myself, but it seemed to be the nearly unanimous opinion.

[Antrax]

So now I need a new definition of perfect minimum I thought I get to choose distribution and HCP quality within the constraints set by the bidding.

[quiddity]

 Antrax, on 2012-February-12, 09:15, said:

I'm still interested in this, BTW. The answer "no" was pretty unanimous, but what is the guiding principal? My "pro" column has we could have as much as 31 HCP and a perfect minimum is enough for slam. What are the cons to balance this?

What do you mean unanimous? I count 6 votes for sign-off and 3 votes for slam invite.
I also see several people saying they would prefer to transfer and bid spades because they think the hand shows promise, but after the given auction they would just sign-off because now they have no way to show shape - 4♥ is just a general invitation. So they would like to make a try but they think partner will not have the necessary information to make an intelligent decision.

[Antrax]

Thanks, that's the kind of comment I was looking for (regarding partner not knowing what I'm looking for, and just having 24 HCP won't be enough of course). At the table partner keycarded and the Q ask was enough for him to make an intelligent decision, but that's just because he had 4 keys himself. I guess if he had 3, or just a weak trump suit (Axxx or so) that would've been too risky a route to take.

[Zelandakh]

 Antrax, on 2012-February-12, 09:51, said:

So now I need a new definition of perfect minimum I thought I get to choose distribution and HCP quality within the constraints set by the bidding.

If you have a 22hcp hand all in aces and kings you could (and usually should) upgrade the hand to 23. Therefore, if you are constructing such hands you need to subtract a point. Incidentally, the rule I learned (Culbertson) was a minimum that made slam laydown. The other Culbertson slam rule was the 50% one. There is also Hamman's (non-egg) rule here: Don't play me for the perfect cards, I never have them.

As others have said it is a good idea to think a little bit about how you can use the space over a 2NT opening. When you play regular Stayman you have a lot more space than you think to show various hand patterns. It also does not make alot of sense to have duplication - if 2NT - 3♦; 3♥ - 3♠ shows 5♥4♠ then you do not need 2NT - 3♣; 3♦ - 3♠ for this purpose since you get more information from the transfer sequence than the Stayman one. Perhaps the 3♠ bid after Stayman could be used to show clubs for example.

Of course you can also play the transfer sequence as 5-5 but then you also need to know the difference between that and 2NT - 3♥; 3♠ - 4♥; and many pairs also use 2NT - 4♣ to show both majors too. There is also much much more you can do here beyond this. Even at B/I level I think it is a good idea to think about these things because otherwise bidding over 2NT becomes difficult. Whenever we open NT it should be a big advantage for our side!

[Cascade]

Interestingly with the methods mikeh wrote about if you swap the majors then it is much more attractive to bid 3♠ to make a slam try with hearts as we have all of the four level to decide whether to go beyond 4♥. Here since 4♥ is the only slam try partner has to decide to go to the five-level immediately with much less information.

[phil_20686]

 Cascade, on 2012-February-13, 02:59, said:

Interestingly with the methods mikeh wrote about if you swap the majors then it is much more attractive to bid 3♠ to make a slam try with hearts as we have all of the four level to decide whether to go beyond 4♥. Here since 4♥ is the only slam try partner has to decide to go to the five-level immediately with much less information.

Yes, but that in itself is a matter of style.

Since 4H is the only bid, and opener has to move or not, does that mean that opener should only move with a perfecto, and partner will try the 5 level if an average hand makes slam good.

Alternatively, one can think that since there is less room the invitation should be sounder/more serious.

I would rarely go past 4S over 4H, and expect partner to make another try if a normalish 2N opener can make slam v good. This is obv a style thing. Mikeh obviously plays the other way, and thinks 4h should be sounder and moving more common. This seems like a small thing, but if south is moving with 20% of 2N openers, instead of 50% of 2N openers, that probably makes at least one HCP worth difference in what it is right to invite with.