[bowbells]

Hi All

I would like to check my understanding of using stolen X when opps interfere over a 1NT bid. I appreciate all comments but welcome direct responses to my question(s).

1> 1N-2C-X = stayman - Correct yes/no ?
2> 1N-2D-X = transfer to hearts - Correct yes/no?
3> 1N-2H-X = transfer to spades - Correct yes/no?

Would it be correct to think all other doubles on 2 level from 1N opener should be considered as penaulty? ie. 1N-P-2C-2S-X

If partnership agree, can stolen X be used to show minor transfers. ie. 1N-2S-X or again are these worth more as penaulty bids?

Thanks in advanced

[pclayton]

bowbells, on Sep 28 2004, 08:18 PM, said:

Hi All

I would like to check my understanding of using stolen X when opps interfere over a 1NT bid. I appreciate all comments but welcome direct responses to my question(s).

1> 1N-2C-X = stayman - Correct yes/no ?
2> 1N-2D-X = transfer to hearts - Correct yes/no?
3> 1N-2H-X = transfer to spades - Correct yes/no?

Would it be correct to think all other doubles on 2 level from 1N opener should be considered as penaulty? ie. 1N-P-2C-2S-X

If partnership agree, can stolen X be used to show minor transfers. ie. 1N-2S-X or again are these worth more as penaulty bids?

Thanks in advanced

Let the others check in, but I only play Stolen in the Stayman sequence; even then its more 'card' showing anyway; not specifically tied to the majors. Opener frequently passes then we get the option of knocking them off at the 2 level - by either partner.

Question to those that play it: how much strength does it promise? Can Opener compete to the 3 level over a 4th chair bid?

Much prefer to have the double as negative over natural 2 level action; and penalty oriented if the call shows a 2 suiter.

[inquiry]

bowbells, on Sep 29 2004, 12:18 AM, said:

Hi All

I would like to check my understanding of using stolen X when opps interfere over a 1NT bid. I appreciate all comments but welcome direct responses to my question(s).



Would it be correct to think all other doubles on 2 level from 1N opener should be considered as penaulty? ie. 1N-P-2C-2S-X

If partnership agree, can stolen X be used to show minor transfers. ie. 1N-2S-X or again are these worth more as penaulty bids?

Thanks in advanced

1> 1N-2C-X = stayman - Correct yes/no ?

I play this as stayman, yes. But a lot of people use it to show clubs, especially if EAST 2C is artificial.

If double showed stayman, then all other bids are as if they had not overcalled, with the possible exception of 3C... (if they showed clubs, what is 3C is open to specialized agreement)

2> 1N-2D-X = transfer to hearts - Correct yes/no?

No, Here I think the double is best used for "takeout" or, if you are "old fashion" (the way it use to mean), the double shows diamonds.

3> 1N-2H-X = transfer to spades - Correct yes/no?

No, Here I think the double is best used for "takeout" or, if you are "old fashion" (the way it use to mean), the double shows hearts.

Now having said that, you COULD play double of 2D as transfer to hearts, and dobule of 2H as transfer to spades, and dobule of 2S as club transfer... but I think this is wasteful. And since these "transfers" could be on very weak hands/suits, your partner would never be able to convert to penatly. You are giving them a free ride with their overcall.. You can always "compete" by simply bidding your suit to play, using lebehnshol to invite, or jumping to three level to force. But now the negative double, allows you to compete on hands where your hand has no clear action available. And can include your partner converting your takeout double to penalty.

Ben

[Free]

I played this in my early days, and didn't give us much problems, but also not much advantages. I don't think Dbl to show a transfer hand is the right way to go, since you already lost your Stayman.

Usually I play some combination of Lebensohl and Rubensohl, with exceptions over 2♣ where Dbl is Stayman and other bids stay like nobody bid (except pass is forcing for 1 round to be able to play 2♦ or 2♣*). This way I have an invitational and GF stayman, transfers in all suits, 2-level bids weak to play,... Only disadvantage is that it might be too complicated for some of us...

[cherdano]

Just to clarify: Inquiry answered whether you should play these bids this way. If you have agreed stolen bid, then they do indeed have the meaning that you describe. (Although over 2S you should not assume it without discussion.)

I also prefer stolen bid only against 2♣ when it is natural, or unspecified one-suiter. Against the other suits, bid as naturally, I think penalty double is the simplest solution and not so bad. (But take-out superior, if you take the effort to talk a little about reopening doubles.)

[inquiry]

cherdano, on Sep 29 2004, 11:05 AM, said:

Just to clarify: Inquiry answered whether you should play these bids this way.

I could have just gave a one word answer, "yes"... but I have a lot of extra words laying around so I am trying to use them all up. :-)

I thought the end of my message, explaining that you could play it this way meant that, yes, stolen bid would be dbl of 2D as transfer etc.. .so I tried to add a little of what I think is the correct logic for what the bids should mean....