[ynhhyjb]

Who has a good structure for 2N:20-21 responses? Please recommend.

[mikeh]

It would help to have some idea of your skill level. For the vast majority of players a relatively simple structure involving transfers at the 3 and 4 level would be a good start. Some pairs like puppet stayman over 2N. I won’t usually play a basic puppet over 2N…I think losing smolen is too costly but I do play a form of muppet, which covers both opener’s possible 5 card major and allows responder to show a 5=4/4=5 major hand as well.

You can find write ups of Jacoby and Texas transfers as well as puppet and muppet online.

If that’s too basic for you, i don’t know where to point you. Most expert pairs who are seriously into systems use methods of their own devising. In my main partnership we play a very complicated method. It’s so complex that I read the notes on it before any serious event we may play.

A partial summary would include, after a 2N bid:

3C is stayman. Opener’s 3D denies a 4 or 5 card heart suit or a 4 card spade suit, but may have 5S….3H by responder asks. Responders 3S or 3N bids over 3D are smolen.

The responses to stayman are 3H shows 4-5 hearts and denies spades. Responder’s 3S bid asks for heart length. 3S by opener is 4=4 majors, responder transfers to his preferred major if he’s found a fit. 3N by opener is 4S, responder can transfer back to spades

3D/H are Jacoby transfers.

3S is a relay to 3N, either to play or responder will show either both minors 5=5 or better or one minor, both gf.

3N shows some 5=4 or 4=5 minor hand with mild slam interest. We have gadgets over that

4C is 5S and 4 diamonds, slam interest

4D/ H are Texas transfers.

We play a form of optional keycard if responder shows a minor. We play a lot of asking bids by responder. For example, 2N 3D 3H…now 3S asks opener for his heart length…3N is 2….with 3+ opener bids 4C min or answers keycards with a good hand. Responder only bids 3S with slam interest…he can offer a choice of games via 3N over 3H.

There’s a lot of detail I’ve omitted since I doubt this would be of much interest to most readers. But I outlined a little of it.

2N is famously called a slam killer. I don’t accept that at all…but I do agree that most pairs bid poorly after their side opens 2N, because simple methods just can’t do a good job on a consistent basis,

[DavidKok]

Here's what I play, with some thoughts at the end:

• 3♣: Puppet Stayman (see end).
  
• 3♦: 5(+)♥, forcing to game.
  
• 3♥: 5(+)♠, forcing to game.
  
• 3♠: At least (54)+ in the minors, forcing to game.
  
• 3NT: To play.
  
• 4♣: 6(+)♥, at least mild slam interest.
  
• 4♦: 6(+)♠, at least mild slam interest.
  
• 4♥: 6(+)♣, at least mild slam interest.
  
• 4♠: 6(+)♦, at least mild slam interest.
  
• 4NT: Quantitative.
  
• 5♣: To play.
  
• 5♦: To play.

Here are a few thoughts on this structure, and advantages of them over other 2NT structures I'm familiar with:

• Puppet Stayman is probably inferior to both Muppet Stayman and regular Stayman (using 2NT-3♣; 3♦-3M as Smolen). I play it because everybody does here, and it's what I grew up playing, and the difference isn't huge. However, I think it is not best, and I'd be very open to changing this.
  
• A lot of the details are in the continuations after a Puppet Stayman or Jacoby bid, which I haven't spelled out here. I play most sequences natural on those starts.
  
• The Jacoby transfers being forcing to game is really nice. Opener completes the transfer with a fit and rejects it without one. The point is that stopping on a dime in 3M is a bad idea, even with a very weak hand, as you can't diagnose when it's right to pass 2NT/play 3M/go to game. The extra space helps a bunch if responder is stronger and you can unambiguously look for slam. It is possible to flip opener's rebids - transfer complete denies a fit and rejecting it shows one - which is basically 'mandatory superaccepts with fit'. However, I think it is worse. The space is more important on the fit auction, and we want the 2NT opener to be the first to bid the trump suit.
  
• I strongly recommend playing 3NT as natural, and not using some '3♠ is a relay to 3NT' gadget as a substitute. Artificial 2NT-3NT sequences have a huge reputation for mistakes as well as for UI of the worst kind. My own 3♠ always shows both minors, so that opener is in a good position to evaluate the hand. I know others instead use it to show either minor (rather than both), which I think is worse. Now opener has little safety in bypassing 3NT, so you don't get as much of a dialogue.
  
• The two-under transfers are nice, though not terrific. Responding one step up shows a slam-positive hand for this suit, while completing the two-under transfer instead shows a slam-negative hand.

[mw64ahw]

I like bids over a (semi)-balanced 20-21 to be game forcing, but also the ability to stop in a 3-level contract. To achieve this I play a 'reverse birthright' structure where 2♣-2♦-2♥-2♠-2N shows 20-21. Responder breaks the sequence by not bidding 2♠

The backbone of the bidding structure is a non-promissory 5-card Major ask, which will find all Major suit fits and still manage to stop in 3N when responder has 55xx opposite 22(54).
After 3♣:
3♦ denies 5M, not 2/3♥2♠, includes 54xx & 55xx
.. 3♥ denies 4♥
.. 3♠ shows 4♥
.. 3N 44xx
.. 4m 54xx & 55xx SI. There must be a Major suit fit.
.. 4♥ 54xx & 55xx GF. There must be a Major suit fit
3♥ 2/3♥2♠ allows play in 3N when 55xx opposite 22(54)
.. 3♠ puppet to 3N
.. 3N 55xx
3♠ 5♠
3N 5♥

Other bids
3♦ 5+♥ GF, includes 45xx, 6+♥ SI
.. 3♥ 2/3♥ forcing
.... 3♠ relay to 3N
.... 3N 45xx
.. 3♠ 5233

3♥ 5+♠, includes 6+♠ SI
.. 3♠ 2/3♠ forcing
.. 3N 2533

3♠ puppet to 3N
.. Pass to play
.. 4♣ 6♣
.. 4♦ 6♦
.. 4♥ 2155
.. 4♠ 1255
.. 4N 3055

3N xx(54) SI
4♣ Gerber CRO
4♦ 6+♥ GF, x42x,4432,3433,3334 SI
4♥ 6+♠ GF, 42xx,4342,4333 SI
4♠ 2♠x4x,3442,3343 SI
See 'Yellow Rose of Texas' for for follow-ups to the balanced slam tries
4N 0355 SI
5♣ to play
5♦ to play

[mikeh]

DavidKok, on 2026-April-04, 23:21, said:

Here's what I play, with some thoughts at the end:

• 3♣: Puppet Stayman (see end).
  
• 3♦: 5(+)♥, forcing to game.
  
• 3♥: 5(+)♠, forcing to game.
  
• 3♠: At least (54)+ in the minors, forcing to game.
  
• 3NT: To play.
  
• 4♣: 6(+)♥, at least mild slam interest.
  
• 4♦: 6(+)♠, at least mild slam interest.
  
• 4♥: 6(+)♣, at least mild slam interest.
  
• 4♠: 6(+)♦, at least mild slam interest.
  
• 4NT: Quantitative.
  
• 5♣: To play.
  
• 5♦: To play.

Here are a few thoughts on this structure, and advantages of them over other 2NT structures I'm familiar with:

• Puppet Stayman is probably inferior to both Muppet Stayman and regular Stayman (using 2NT-3♣; 3♦-3M as Smolen). I play it because everybody does here, and it's what I grew up playing, and the difference isn't huge. However, I think it is not best, and I'd be very open to changing this.
  
• A lot of the details are in the continuations after a Puppet Stayman or Jacoby bid, which I haven't spelled out here. I play most sequences natural on those starts.
  
• The Jacoby transfers being forcing to game is really nice. Opener completes the transfer with a fit and rejects it without one. The point is that stopping on a dime in 3M is a bad idea, even with a very weak hand, as you can't diagnose when it's right to pass 2NT/play 3M/go to game. The extra space helps a bunch if responder is stronger and you can unambiguously look for slam. It is possible to flip opener's rebids - transfer complete denies a fit and rejecting it shows one - which is basically 'mandatory superaccepts with fit'. However, I think it is worse. The space is more important on the fit auction, and we want the 2NT opener to be the first to bid the trump suit.
  
• I strongly recommend playing 3NT as natural, and not using some '3♠ is a relay to 3NT' gadget as a substitute. Artificial 2NT-3NT sequences have a huge reputation for mistakes as well as for UI of the worst kind. My own 3♠ always shows both minors, so that opener is in a good position to evaluate the hand. I know others instead use it to show either minor (rather than both), which I think is worse. Now opener has little safety in bypassing 3NT, so you don't get as much of a dialogue.
  
• The two-under transfers are nice, though not terrific. Responding one step up shows a slam-positive hand for this suit, while completing the two-under transfer instead shows a slam-negative hand.

Your point about not liking 3S as a puppet to 3N strikes me as misguided. The main cost to the method is not, in my considerable experience, forgetting or creating UI of any kind. The main cost is allowing 4th chair to make a lead directing double when, after 2N 3N opening leader would not otherwise have led spades.

I have played differing versions of 3S puppet to 3N for 40 years. In all but one partnership 3S will be based on next showing one or both minors, and there’s little downside to that, since we’re not -laying in no trump very often after that start, and when we do it’s because opener has the majors well stopped.

In my main partnership the gain, so far, from 2N 3N being a mild minor slam try far outweighs the so far non existent cost of a lead directing double of 3S.

And that’s been tested in high level competition.

Now, if one is prone to forgets or is ethically challenged, I suppose one might be best advised to not play 3S puppet to 3N, but maybe such a player should not play puppet stayman or transfers or responsive doubles or even stayman!

I have played 3S as a puppet with many partners, including players with whom I’ve not previously played. I have played probably in excess of thirty thousand hands using this method…of course that means 3S has come up in the hundreds of occasions. I cannot remember any forgets and definitely no UI. I do tend to play with strong players but they are not all experts.

This ‘don’t play this because it’s hard to remember’ is an argument against, say, relay methods or methods that require pages and pages of notes. But 2N 3S 3N on minorvsuit hands is one of the simpler gadgets in common play today. It’s certainly no more difficult than puppet stayman or 2 way new minor.

[DavidKok]

The UI and mistakes are on the 2NT-3NT sequence. When I said

DavidKok, on 2026-April-04, 23:21, said:

Artificial 2NT-3NT sequences have a huge reputation for mistakes as well as for UI of the worst kind.

I was talking about the 2NT-3NT sequence. Not the 2NT-3♠ sequence.

'Fun' fact: you can play 2NT-3NT both artificial and 'to play'! Just write notes that say that it's artificial, but if you bid in in tempo both you and partner 'forget' and if you break tempo it's artificial. If opponents call you out on the slow sequence, the notes are unambiguous and protect you. And they won't know to call on the in tempo unalerted natural sequence.
Before any hackles get raised, I don't know people who do this and I'm not accusing anyone - though I have seen people forget their artificial 3NT agreement and have awful UI problems after that, and I've also seen the 'both forget in tempo 3NT' though I believe it was a genuine accident. What I am saying is that this convention gains little and has a huge historic error rate.

[mikeh]

DavidKok, on 2026-April-05, 13:31, said:

The UI and mistakes are on the 2NT-3NT sequence. When I said I was talking about the 2NT-3NT sequence. Not the 2NT-3♠ sequence.

'Fun' fact: you can play 2NT-3NT both artificial and 'to play'! Just write notes that say that it's artificial, but if you bid in in tempo both you and partner 'forget' and if you break tempo it's artificial. If opponents call you out on the slow sequence, the notes are unambiguous and protect you. And they won't know to call on the in tempo unalerted natural sequence.
Before any hackles get raised, I don't know people who do this and I'm not accusing anyone - though I have seen people forget their artificial 3NT agreement and have awful UI problems after that, and I've also seen the 'both forget in tempo 3NT' though I believe it was a genuine accident. What I am saying is that this convention gains little and has a huge historic error rate.

I guarantee you that neither my partner nor I have ever forgotten this sequence. Ever.

Of course, we are the type of player who loves complex methods and this one…2N 3N as mild slam interest n the minors…is one of the simplest gadgets we play.

As for not gaining anything, that sure sounds like someone who, not having ever played this method, has told himself, completely free of evidence, that it’s bad. I’d estimate that over the past four years we’ve bid and made 5 or 6 slams not bid at the other table and, so far, haven’t gone down in any that were missed by the opps. We don’t play often….he has time issues due to owning and running his various businesses and I’ve never been one to travel much for bridge but we have probably played 1,000 hands h that interval.

In addition, the gadget is virtually fool proof. By definition, 3N is non forcing. With no interest in 3N, responder shows his hand by going through 3S. In fact, 2N 3N gets passed a lot more often than it leads to a slam. Opener needs a hand that meshes well..ideally a long reasonably strng minor and something like Hx in the other plus major suit controls, not quacks. 3N is bid on hands where responder is just a tad too weak for an invitational 4N, but which has promise opposite a good mesh.

So, if someone did use it and their partner forgot, they might miss an otherwise hard to bid slam but they are usually pushing the board in 3N.

[DavidKok]

mikeh, on 2026-April-05, 14:05, said:

As for not gaining anything, that sure sounds like someone who, not having ever played this method, has told himself, completely free of evidence, that it’s bad. I’d estimate that over the past four years we’ve bid and made 5 or 6 slams not bid at the other table and, so far, haven’t gone down in any that were missed by the opps. We don’t play often….he has time issues due to owning and running his various businesses and I’ve never been one to travel much for bridge but we have probably played 1,000 hands h that interval.

I put this hand type in 3♠. You're gaining by having cheaper single-suited minor slam tries instead, where I need the three-under transfers. I did not say or imply that your convention does not gain anything.

mikeh, on 2026-April-05, 14:05, said:

So, if someone did use it and their partner forgot, they might miss an otherwise hard to bid slam but they are usually pushing the board in 3N.

The costly mistake is when responder bids 3NT, intending it to be natural but opener pulls. This is the costly error and UI problem I've seen several times, as this almost always comes with a break in tempo.
I fully believe you when you say that it has been fine in your partnership, but I would still not recommend the gadget.

[mw64ahw]

Thinking about long minor suit slam tries further.

• With (4x)(6x) I guess that most of us would look for the 44 Major suit fit first via 3♣.
• Now playing a 5-card Major ask such as the one I posted above, should we also be looking for 53 Major suit fits in the first instance with (3x)(6x) type hands?
• This works with a full sequence such as 2N-3♣-3♦ denies 5M-3♥ denies 4♥-3♠/3N followed by 4m initiating a slam try. A bit long-winded and opportunities to double for lead, but if we are in good slam territory I'm not bothered.
• Taking this route for long minors can free up bids for specific minor suit slam tries, such as:
  • 2N-3N xx54
  • 2N-3♠ puppet to 3N
    • Pass to play
    • 4♣ xx45
    • 4♦ 0355
    • 4♥ 3055
    • 4♠ 2155
    • 4N 1255
• Alternatively using 2N-3N as natural
  • 3♠ xx(45) MSS
  • 3N to play
  • 4♣ (21)55
  • 4♦ 0355
  • 4♥ 3055
  • 4♠ 2155 weak doubleton
  • 4N 1255 weak doubleton
• Now 2N-4N is freed up versus the structure in my previous post which could be quantitative with a 5 card minor.

A note on losing 1N-3N to play.
This can lead to errors playing in a newish partnership, but in a more established one I find that the mindset of playing x♠ as a puppet etc. to xN becomes more engrained. Examples are a) 1♣-1♠ playing TW as a relay, b) 1N-2♦-2♥-2♠ as a range ask etc. This approach provides the opportunity to show a wider range of shapes/strengths in uncontested auctions.

Thoughts?