Those pesky 9 counts

[Doug Deacon]

My partner (a strong player but new to KS) is  concerned about responding to a 1m opening on certain balanced 9 counts. 

If opener is balanced and...

... opens 1C:

- when responder holds =3334, it begins 1C-2C-2N...

... opens 1D:

- when responder holds =3343, it begins 1D-2D-2N...

- when responder holds =3334 or =xxx5, it begins 1D-2C-2N...

Responder can't pass 2N, opener may have up to 19. With these flat shapes, there's no sensible m-suit rebid, so it appears we've endplayed ourselves into 3NT.  This may put us in 3N on a combined 24... against the field at matchpoints and pretty aggressive even at IMPs.

Has this been a problem for your KS partnerships? How do you manage this?

[Doug Deacon]

Thanks, Robert. 

> we bid 1D over 1C with as few as 3 diamonds when holding 9+ points it that seems better than 2C.

That's what my partner wants to do.

My question: what happens when it goes 1c-1d-2d or 1c-1d-3d? There we are, in a 7-card suit...

Of course this only addresses 1C openings. Do you have a "fix" for 1D openings when a 9-point responder has 4 (5) clubs and o other suit?

On Mon, Mar 9, 2026, 2:16 PM ROBERT PARK <bpa...@comcast.net> wrote:

Kinda hate to admit it, but my partner & I are deviant...by a point.

We require 10 points for those 2m bids. And we bid 1D over 1C with as few as 3 diamonds when holding 9+ points it that seems better than 2C.

This has not proved troublesome. 1D followed by 1N then shows 9-11 points.

  --Bob Park

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Kaplan-Sheinwold Bidding System" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kaplan-sheinwo...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/CA%2BQeTQiW2aMPkemWuX08zZa0q%2BLL7XCLzPdUBL3XiXeZODRhNQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[ROBERT PARK]

Kinda hate to admit it, but my partner & I are deviant...by a point.

We require 10 points for those 2m bids. And we bid 1D over 1C with as few as 3 diamonds when holding 9+ points it that seems better than 2C.

This has not proved troublesome. 1D followed by 1N then shows 9-11 points.

  --Bob Park

On 03/09/2026 1:51 PM EDT Doug Deacon <doug...@gmail.com> wrote:

 

 

--

[jerome keslin]

According to B1. 

The fix.

1d - 2c is 9-11/12

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/CA%2BQeTQhsMYrOqrqr5SUzk_oDTcsY97v0tM4M1u71JGotoVi_tQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Doug Deacon]

Jerome,  that's not the fix. It's the problem.

9 + 15 ≠ 25

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/CAOz7kNpEMnr6GjQHUJ-EKZY2KCHnUg6aN%3DJ%2BRDpGaC-Ke4Y0Yg%40mail.gmail.com.

[jerome keslin]

Sorry misunderstood.

So what does 1d - 2c show?

Kokish " fixes " by allowing a major response to be on a 3 carder.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/CA%2BQeTQiKDP7owVzN0xSgj60mnW4VH7%2B4V8awW45FDXNUVJg%3Dpg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Doug Deacon]

For us, 2C shows what B-19 says, except we eliminated the weak option (long clubs, 4 diamonds, 8 or less). 

Therefore, 2C shows 9+, including flat 9-11 counts with no 4cM (and promises GF values if holding a 4cM or 4-card D fit).  

The concern is a flat 9 count when opener has a balanced 15.  KSU endplays us into 3N.

Kokish's "fix" sounds almost KSU-ish.  If opener can rebid and even reverse into a 3cM, why shouldn't responder bid one too?!

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/CAOz7kNrODQQ67DQngF%2BNSdPz4ZHm18r4G3z1L9RzvkG1jEE0Lw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Steve Willner]

On 3/10/26 10:49 AM, Doug Deacon wrote:
> The concern is a flat 9 count when opener has a balanced 15.  KSU
> endplays us into 3N.

With the same hands, strong notrumpers will (or at least should be)
playing 3NT. (Of course some hands with 9 HCP will be devalued and
treated differently.) At least at IMPs, if some of the strong
notrumpers use an invitational 2NT and stop there, on average our 3NT
will gain, at least according to the simulations I've seen.

[jerome keslin]

you can see it in the Weak nt system by the late Eric Kokish and Kraft

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Kaplan-Sheinwold Bidding System" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kaplan-sheinwo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/63678eec-eb7a-4f6a-a2b4-f6692fe72ecc%40cjsw.us.

[Doug Deacon]

I remember reading that doc ages ago. Some interesting ideas,  but this isn't one of them IMO.

Gains: 

- avoids 3NT on 15 + 9; and

-  avoids wrong siding 1N with 5-8 opposite 15-17 (which actually matters only a small percentage of the time). 

Costs: 

- puts us in 4-3 2M contracts when we belong in 1NT. The short trump hand has no ruffing value but the long trump hand often does, letting the defense tap and gain trump control... and it wrong sides that wrong contract!

- as their 1N shows 8-10, and they say a 15 point opener should pass, they miss 3NT on 15 + 10.

Seems like drinking strychnine for a cold. You won't have the cold much longer, but...

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/CAOz7kNopWCxXme1dsoVBs2i-1_a06HkBKowfph4VuKe2NvA84w%40mail.gmail.com.

[jerome keslin]

I think it depends on the dose, to route Paracelsus.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/CA%2BQeTQiGq_QyivJSXJfYqeSqZOpT2_rVuTjY5MEoVTBUM_18-A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Doug Deacon]

I suppose. 

When dosing 4-3 fits, I prefer Sonny Moyse's prescriptions to his.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/CAOz7kNrTvUuSiAHzriKV6xj25eFzxW32ybhQUW6OQ0DiCRjLVQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Carl WEISMAN]

On Mar 11, 2026, at 3:10 PM, jerome keslin <jet...@gmail.com> wrote:

- puts us in 4-3 2M contracts when we belong in 1NT. The short trump hand has no ruffing value but the long trump hand often does, letting the defense tap and gain trump control…

When you’re declaring a 4-3, you don’t call it being tapped; you call it reversing the dummy.

[Christopher Monsour]

As long as you liberally downgrade bad 9 counts, I have find that KSU works well as written.  (I also downgrade bad 15 counts.)

A sound 15 opposite a sound 9 is worth bidding 3N on.

Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
Get Outlook for Android

---

From: 'Carl WEISMAN' via The Kaplan-Sheinwold Bidding System <kaplan-s...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2026 5:12:37 PM
To: kaplan-s...@googlegroups.com <kaplan-s...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Those pesky 9 counts

 

On Mar 11, 2026, at 3:10 PM, jerome keslin <jet...@gmail.com> wrote:

- puts us in 4-3 2M contracts when we belong in 1NT. The short trump hand has no ruffing value but the long trump hand often does, letting the defense tap and gain trump control…

When you’re declaring a 4-3, you don’t call it being tapped; you call it reversing the dummy.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Kaplan-Sheinwold Bidding System" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kaplan-sheinwo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/0D74DDB6-3046-43F6-A5CD-798CD30B7FA2%40verizon.net.

[Doug Deacon]

😅😅😅

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Kaplan-Sheinwold Bidding System" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kaplan-sheinwo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/0D74DDB6-3046-43F6-A5CD-798CD30B7FA2%40verizon.net.

[Doug Deacon]

Just last night,  I found myself declaring 2S holding AJx facing dummy's Kxx. Pretty powerful for a 6-card fit.

With careful play (perhaps aided by defenders who had no idea what was going on), I brought it home for +110.

All other pairs stumbled into the 6-3 heart fit... and went down in 4H, so +110 was a cold top.

You have to know your limits!

On Wed, Mar 11, 2026, 5:12 PM 'Carl WEISMAN' via The Kaplan-Sheinwold Bidding System <kaplan-s...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Kaplan-Sheinwold Bidding System" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kaplan-sheinwo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/0D74DDB6-3046-43F6-A5CD-798CD30B7FA2%40verizon.net.

[Christopher Monsour]

In my first Spingold we had a kickback misunderstanding.  1D-2D-(2S)-3H-4H-P.  It turned out the limit was 10 tricks in the 4-2 heart fit and in the 5-4 diamond fit played at the other table.   (Partner had fortunately forgotten 4H was natural; he had also seriously overvalued his hand.)  It was an embarrassing way to win 12.

Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
Get Outlook for Android

---

From: kaplan-s...@googlegroups.com <kaplan-s...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Doug Deacon <doug...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2026 6:24:12 PM

To: kaplan-s...@googlegroups.com <kaplan-s...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Those pesky 9 counts

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/CA%2BQeTQiAeyhAMheRtiYEUbqJHiDwrrXnVjeqFRzLUmmSPdgBcA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Carl WEISMAN]

BJ Becker’s favorite hand. Making 6C on a 4-2 fit. Without a trump lead, it almost played itself.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/DM6PR15MB269939815A22043BBD8B4FD7D147A%40DM6PR15MB2699.namprd15.prod.outlook.com.

[Doug Deacon]

Steve, 

That's the argument I offered. At IMPs especially, 3N on 24 + 9 is not bad and may be superior to a precisely (and revealingly) bid 2N.

After 1m-2m; 2n or 1d-2c; 2n, opener's range is a vague 15-19. Defenders have a much harder time placing honors than after a standard 1N-2N; 3N, where they know opener's strength within a Jack.

He's a bit fixated on the issue, IMO, but he's my partner so...

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Kaplan-Sheinwold Bidding System" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kaplan-sheinwo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/63678eec-eb7a-4f6a-a2b4-f6692fe72ecc%40cjsw.us.

[Otis Bricker]

I used the same argument to convince a partner long ago to NOT play transfers after a weak NT. 

1N-2d-2h you see the weak hand and know the opener to within 3 points and all suit counts within 3 as well.

1N-2h you see the opener and declarer can have 0-10 and any shape with 5+hearts. 

Transfers are great when you have high slam chances and need to describe your hand but slam and game are much rarer facing 12-14 than 15-17.



And no complex continuations to remember.

Otis

On Mar 11, 2026, at 8:08 PM, Doug Deacon <doug...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/CA%2BQeTQg0ykJFx_m%3DTAJg_aYtXX61ujHHHDw6XCnCs9e5_c9S2A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Doug Deacon]

Otis,

It took me three months to convince this partner to drop his elaborate transfers + relays scheme over the WNT.... for all the reasons you mentioned.

He finally relented. We play 2-way Stayman and SA Texas. All else is natural. It works.

We have added XYNT because that fits. Opener has 15-17 and responder has something (they responded) so game/slam are far more likely than after 1N. Bring on the (sensibly organized) gadgets. Last night after 1m-1H-1N, I was able to show 6+ hearts, spade shortness and slam interest... below 4H. 

He also wants to add XYZ. I haven't told him yet but that's another "no" in KS. After 1C-1x-1M, we must be able to stop in 2C. Responder often bids on near nothing and 1M guarantees 5+ clubs (as we play it). 2C is often the last feasible contract. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/F8398DDB-B1C0-44B7-8725-7D597974E2DC%40gmail.com.

[Adam Wildavsky]

Doug and I use a 2♥ response to 1m to show a balanced 9 or 10. I don't think it's necessary but Doug likes it. It does help to remove these hands from the 2♣ response to 1♦. We occasionally suffer from the lack of a strong jump shift in hearts. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Kaplan-Sheinwold Bidding System" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kaplan-sheinwold+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/CA%2BQeTQiW2aMPkemWuX08zZa0q%2BLL7XCLzPdUBL3XiXeZODRhNQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Alex Martelli]

My simulations (with balanced hands facing each other and no 8+ cards fit in a major) once showed, many years ago (I forget the details but I posted them to Usenet's rec.games.bridge back then), that a quantitative invitational raise of 1N to 2N didn't play for itself -- at either IMPs or MPs you were better off passing 1N or blasting 3N than doing a 2N raise, whatever thresholds you tried to set for inviting vs passing vs blasting, and for passing or raising the invite. (I tried using many hand evaluation metrics but the results didn't change much).

That was with DD play and defense, but either passing 1N (as opps might unwisely balance) or blasting 3N (given declarer's advantage) can take advantage of the pass-or-blast given opps' imperfect info, while a 2N raise, passed or accepted, gives opps more info so THAT is setup that might profit from DD assessment -- and it still loses.

This finding empowered my partner at the time, the late, sadly-missed David Morgan of Australia (a keen KS fan, that's how we connected online on old "OKBridge", before he flew to SF to play with me in the 2007 SF NABC -- that's when I joined the ACBL and got most of my few Platinum MPs!-) to design a great system of responses to a weak NT: Stayman 2C (also used for an invite with 5S), natural sign-offs 2M and 3m, natural INV with 6+ card 3M; 2D=INV+ with 5+H (exactly 5 if just INV, 5+ if GF), 2N=GF with 5+S.

As we both detested (and I still detest:-) Gerber, we also had 4C/4D as South African transfers to 4M (usually with slam interest, but not necessarily: OK also for the purpose of just playing 4M when you know there's no possible advantage in you receiving the lead) and 4H/4S natural sign-offs. (This simple arrangement I still play as responses to 1N and 2N openers of whatever strength, with all my regular partners).

Alas, I'm having a hard time converting to this "Morgan responses" scheme the one partner with whom I can still play weak NT (actually MINI,10-12, 1st to 3rd seat NV -- a strong-club system does allow that risky choice) -- we STILL play transfers over 1N (sigh!!!) cuz pd doesn't want to use drastically different response systems on a 1N opener vs stronger 1N bids such as overcalls of 1N, or 1C-1D; 1N, 16-18, or 1C-1D; 1H(Kokish Birthright)-1S(forced); 1N, 19-21. Sigh...

Alex

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/CA%2BQeTQg0ykJFx_m%3DTAJg_aYtXX61ujHHHDw6XCnCs9e5_c9S2A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Doug Deacon]

Thanks Adam.

Doug-like, I concocted 1C-2D to show 9-11 balanced with clubs, which eliminates this problem over 1C. (Please say "hi" to DD from the other DD in his old club. He's missed... he and Frank introduced me to KS.)

My partner likes Reverse Flannery over 1m, so 1D-2H is unavailable unless he wants to drop that.

Aside from losing SJS, which I'd also prefer, these treatments frequently tell the defenders that declarer has *exactly* 15, which may be costly.  Playing the occasional 3N on 24 is mitigated by the defenders not knowing we're on 24. If declarer has 15-19, we're on 24-28. They can't place missing honors so easily. 

On Sun, Mar 15, 2026, 6:07 PM Adam Wildavsky <ad...@tameware.com> wrote:

Doug and I use a 2♥ response to 1m to show a balanced 9 or 10. I don't think it's necessary but Doug likes it. It does help to remove these hands from the 2♣ response to 1♦. We occasionally suffer from the lack of a strong jump shift in hearts. 

On Tue, Mar 10, 2026 at 1:52 AM, Doug Deacon <doug...@gmail.com> wrote:

My partner (a strong player but new to KS) is  concerned about responding to a 1m opening on certain balanced 9 counts. 

If opener is balanced and...

... opens 1C:

- when responder holds =3334, it begins 1C-2C-2N...

... opens 1D:

- when responder holds =3343, it begins 1D-2D-2N...

- when responder holds =3334 or =xxx5, it begins 1D-2C-2N...

Responder can't pass 2N, opener may have up to 19. With these flat shapes, there's no sensible m-suit rebid, so it appears we've endplayed ourselves into 3NT.  This may put us in 3N on a combined 24... against the field at matchpoints and pretty aggressive even at IMPs.

Has this been a problem for your KS partnerships? How do you manage this?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Kaplan-Sheinwold Bidding System" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kaplan-sheinwo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/CA%2BQeTQiW2aMPkemWuX08zZa0q%2BLL7XCLzPdUBL3XiXeZODRhNQ%40mail.gmail.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Kaplan-Sheinwold Bidding System" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kaplan-sheinwo...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/CAHkRE_1h3KaagJn0%3DmFgqQgJLAem9iTkFSdjhrswQKn54nWEjg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Doug Deacon]

Alex,

Good to see you posting again.  It's been a while (I think).

I made every one of these arguments with my new KS partner, though less eloquently and without being able to cite statistics-based simulations. I may share your comment with him,  if that's okay. 

Unfortunately, he seems obsessed. He wants to insert artificial relays and steps after 1D-2C just to avoid the occasional 3N on 24. That's a hard "no" for me. There's a place for complexity, but this isn't it.

Based on your findings, the solution is simple. If partner opens 1m and I have a balanced 9 with no 4cM, I look at scoring, vulnerability and opponents, then decide whether to stay low (respond 1N) or go for it (respond 2m or in the om). In effect, there is no 9... it's either 8 or 10. Not revealing openers strength beyond a vague "15-19" makes DD defense less likely, which mitigates the risk of going for the game bonus with only 24... if that turns out to be the case.

Re: the WNT, I have convinced him to play responses nearly identical to yours. We play two-way Stayman (2D = GF). All else is just as you described, including SA Texas. After 3-4 months of play (and winning our District GNT qualifier),  he grudgingly admitted that his Byzantine system of transfers and relays isn't necessary.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/CAMTp2%3DYP2GSZx-DZx9THUsdM9p4fqgzn0k9sCt88P5yU-EXOqw%40mail.gmail.com.

[st...@cjsw.us]

Hi, Alex. I think your simulations might be the ones I'm remembering.
However, I recall that with non-integer point count (maybe Thomas
Andrews' fifths count?), at matchpoints, 2NT inv was a double-dummy
benefit when responder held exactly 8.4 or 8.6. As you point out, real
play might be different, and anyway one would have to weigh that benefit
against some other use for 2NT.

I like David's response scheme, but transfers over 12-14 1NT aren't as
terrible as I expected before playing them. Of course I play at a
(much) lower level than you do, and that makes a difference.

> opener vs stronger 1N bids such as *overcalls* of 1N, or 1C-1D; 1N,

> 16-18, or 1C-1D; 1H(Kokish Birthright)-1S(forced); 1N, 19-21. Sigh...

--
Steve Willner

[Alex Martelli]

On Mon, Mar 16, 2026 at 5:45 AM Doug Deacon <doug...@gmail.com> wrote:

Alex,

Good to see you posting again.  It's been a while (I think).

Yep, I haven't played KS in so long (sigh) that I had little to contribute. So I spent more time playing instead, esp. with my wife Anna, now that she's taken up the game (coincidentally, this very month she just made Ruby LM as I made Sapphire LM -- we celebrated w/appropriate mutual gifts of suitable jewels of course:-).

I made every one of these arguments with my new KS partner, though less eloquently and without being able to cite statistics-based simulations. I may share your comment with him,  if that's okay. 

Sure, go ahead!

Unfortunately, he seems obsessed. He wants to insert artificial relays and steps after 1D-2C just to avoid the occasional 3N on 24. That's a hard "no" for me. There's a place for complexity, but this isn't it.

Agreed.

Based on your findings, the solution is simple. If partner opens 1m and I have a balanced 9 with no 4cM, I look at scoring, vulnerability and opponents, then decide whether to stay low (respond 1N) or go for it (respond 2m or in the om). In effect, there is no 9... it's either 8 or 10. Not revealing openers strength beyond a vague "15-19" makes DD defense less likely, which mitigates the risk of going for the game bonus with only 24... if that turns out to be the case.

Makes sense to me.

Re: the WNT, I have convinced him to play responses nearly identical to yours. We play two-way Stayman (2D = GF). All else is just as you described, including SA Texas. After 3-4 months of play (and winning our District GNT qualifier),  he grudgingly admitted that his Byzantine system of transfers and relays isn't necessary.

How do you invite to game as a responder with 5 hearts? 1N-2C; 2S-3H rules out the likely contract of 2N and a 5-2 fit will usually play badly at the 3-level compared to 2N. And I do like being able to run away to a major with 1N-2C;2D-2H "garbage Stayman". 2-way Stayman is competitively better (thanks to the natural signoff responses of 2M), but does make things worse for INV hands w/long H. Maybe, giving up the quant INV nature of 2N (in favor of a pass-or-blast approach w/INV responder hands without majors), one could play an artificial 2N response to show a NF game invite w/5hearts. But the Morgan NT is better as it allows inviting but resting in 2H (in this it's even better than Jacoby transfers, which, once you invite to game w/H, make you play at least 2N or 3N).

Alex

[Alex Martelli]

Very interesting! 

Alex

On Mon, Mar 16, 2026 at 12:23 PM ROBERT PARK <bpa...@comcast.net> wrote:

 

<snip>

 

How do you invite to game as a responder with 5 hearts? 1N-2C; 2S-3H rules out the likely contract of 2N and a 5-2 fit will usually play badly at the 3-level compared to 2N. And I do like being able to run away to a major with 1N-2C;2D-2H "garbage Stayman". 2-way Stayman is competitively better (thanks to the natural signoff responses of 2M), but does make things worse for INV hands w/long H. Maybe, giving up the quant INV nature of 2N (in favor of a pass-or-blast approach w/INV responder hands without majors), one could play an artificial 2N response to show a NF game invite w/5hearts. But the Morgan NT is better as it allows inviting but resting in 2H (in this it's even better than Jacoby transfers, which, once you invite to game w/H, make you play at least 2N or 3N).

 

Alex

My K-S partner and I have been using 2D game tries for 5-card suits for more than 20 years, with good results. We learned about these from Amalya Kearse's "Bridge Conventions Complete," Pages 683-684. If I have it right, this tool predates Stayman. We would not recommend it for strong-notrumpers, but it works quite well for weak-notrumpers of any stripe. The essence is: 2D asks opener to bid the cheapest denomination he would reject a game try in. This shows invitational or better values with a 5+ suit and denies a 4-card major. It's fun to play. It's effective and and has never caused problems for us.  A side benefit is that this frees up 1N-2N for new use. We use that to ask opener to pick a minor.     --Bob Park

 

 

 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Kaplan-Sheinwold Bidding System" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kaplan-sheinwo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kaplan-sheinwold/CAMTp2%3DYkXuejYL0icZRXWeiastVDXnfKG1DNZjb1%3DdsLQX1iZw%40mail.gmail.com.