[Liversidge]

Playing Weak NT, what is a sensible partnership agreement with invitational hands 5-5 or 5-4 in the majors, wanting to show both majors if possible? Except for 5 hearts and 4 spades we can't figure out a way of inviting AND showing both majors without potentially getting too high. Something has to give, it seems, but what?

5 Spades, 4 Hearts and 11-12 HCP:

Do I bid Stayman? If partner responds 2♦ do I bid 2♠, 3♥ or 3♠
Do I bid 2♥ (transfer to spades)? What do I bid next? Pass, 2NT, 3♥?


5 hearts, 5 spades and 11-12 HCP:

Same questions (We play that 1NT - 3-any is game forcing in the bid suit, slam interest)

[Cyberyeti]

5♥/5♠ and an 11 count I just bid game, 9-10 is more interesting. Some people use one of the 4m bids to show 5-5M.

What 1N-2♣-2♦-3M means most often depends on where you come from. In the UK it used to be an invite with 5 of the bid major and 4 of the other. In the US it tends to be GF with 4 cards in that major and 5 in the other to rightside 4M opposite a strong notrump.

You could consider using 1N-3somethings to show the inv 5-5 if you wanted to do that, for example if you used 3♥, you can use 1N-2♦-2♥-3♠ as the old fashioned rock crushing hand with hearts, all you lose is the splinter on a 1633 type.

[mycroft]

Old-fashioned: "promissory Stayman": 1NT-2♣; 2♦-2M is invitational. Now it was usually played with a bunch of gadgets that limited what kinds of hands you had, but still. Downside is you can't bid Stayman-and-get-out with a 5-4 zero count.

More modern: You commonly have three ranges (weak, inv, GF+) and two 5-4 bids: 1NT-2♣; 2♦-2M and ...3M. Pick one to bail on (I pick the weak one) and just pick-a-suit with it; use the other two auctions to show the other two.

Certainly, 1NT-3M showing 5-5 major hands (3♥ INV, 3♠ GF) is common, and if you don't have a good meaning for that auction, you can use it. If you like your 3M bids, well, then you can't. Of course, my standard line is "I don't care what 3-bids are, they don't come up anyway. But we have to define them, or they will."

[Stephen Tu]

With 5-5s, the common methods are probably:
1. 1nt-3h/3s = 5-5 inv/gf in majors respectively
2. 1nt-2h-2s-3h = GF 5-5
1nt-2d-2h-2s = inv 5-5
less common but reasonable:
3. 1nt-3d = 5-5 inv+ both majors

For 5-4s, most common schemes start with stayman.
with 5-4 GF, jump to 3 level M over 1nt-2c-2d
1nt-2c-2d-3H = either 5 cd heart/4 spades or 5 cd spade/4heart (smolen transfer) by agreement

with inv hands:
1nt-2c-2d-2s = 5+ spades inv (may or not have hearts)
1nt-2c-2d-2h = 5+ H inv (4 cd spades).
But this scheme gives up on garbage stayman.
One could use 1nt-2d-2h-2s as 4cd spade/5h inv, but then that gives up on using it to show a 5-5, which then loses you a 3 level bid used for something else. Or it loses you "Walsh relay" using this sequence as some non-heart hand.

Basically there are a limited number of sequences and you deploy them how you think best. Personally I give up on invites with 5-4 in the majors. I just "pass or blast" on these if partner doesn't bid a major in response to stayman, decide to GF or try to play a partial treating it as weak.

[1eyedjack]

If you are not playing Smollen(*) then the simplest set of rules (for a beginner embarking on transfers) could be: Transfer then new suit = GF. Stayman then new suit at 3 level = invite with 5+. This works reasonably well also with 4-suit transfers.

It could be inefficient for 1N-2D-2H-2S to be GF with 4-5-?-?, but as I say, in contest I am only thinking of where simplicity comes at a premium.

With 5-5 in the majors GF you could take the view that there is minimal realistic likelihood of 3N being right, in which case you can afford to go to the 4 level to describe your shape (probably by initially indicating 5 - 4+ shape, and then confirming at the 4 level that the 4+ element is actually 5).

In no way do I suggest that this is optimal. Only that it is workable and definitely simple.

* Smollen is where you start with stayman with a GF hand with 5-4 in the majors and then follow up (over 2D) with 3 of your 4-card major, thereby promising exactly 4 in that suit and 5 in the other major. The idea being to get the 1N opener to declare the hand in whichever major you have a fit. That rather messes up having a simple rule to show invitational hands with 5-4 in the majors, compared with the structure mentioned above.

[Zelandakh]

First of all I will write what I play, which is not what I would recommend for N/B, both for complexity and because it is built around 2♣ as Puppet Stayman:

5♥-4♠ INV: 1NT - 2♦; 2♥ - 2NT
5♠-4♥ INV: 1NT - 2NT
5♠-5♥ INV: 1NT - 2♥; 2♠ - 3♥
5♥-4♠ GF: 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 3♣; 3♦ - 3♠
5♠-4♥ GF: 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 3♣; 3♦ - 3♥
5♥-5♠ GF: 1NT - 2♦; 2♥ - 3♦


Instead, here are some similar models that would be more suitable:-
--
--1: Extended Stayman
--
5♥-4♠ INV: 1NT - 2♦; 2♥ - 2♠
5♠-4♥ INV: 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 2♠
5♠-5♥ INV: 1NT - 2♥; 2♠ - 3♥
5-4 GF (either way) or 5-5 GF: 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 3♦ (asks for 3 card major)
NB: You need to assign a sequence to GF hands with a 4 card major and longer diamonds (1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 3M is available if nothing better)
--
--2: Artificial 3♦
--
5♥-4♠ INV: 1NT - 2♦; 2♥ - 2♠
5♠-4♥ INV: 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 2♠
5♠-5♥ INV: 1NT - 2♥; 2♠ - 3♥
5♥-4♠ GF: 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 3♥ (or 3♠ Smolen if preferred)
5♠-4♥ GF: 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 3♠ (or 3♥ Smolen if preferred)
5♥-5♠ GF: 1NT - 3♦
NB: You need to assign a sequence to the hand you were using a 3♦ for. If that is natural and slammy as per the OP, either bundle it into 2♠ or Stayman, or use black suit transfers (2♠ for clubs, 3♣ for diamonds)
--
--3: SA
--
5♥-4♠ INV: 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 2♥
5♠-4♥ INV: 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 2♠
5♠-5♥ INV: 1NT - 2♦; 2♥ - 2♠
5♥-4♠ GF: 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 3♥ (or 3♠ Smolen if preferred)
5♠-4♥ GF: 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 3♠ (or 3♥ Smolen if preferred)
5♥-5♠ GF: 1NT - 2♥; 2♠ - 3♥
NB: Here you are losing Crawling Stayman but gaining simplicity
--

As you have found there are a limited number of sequences available for invites, particularly if you add in additional requirements such as Crawling Stayman or low-level Puppet. When designing a NT scheme, I usually start with working out which of these I have available and fitting these hands in first before moving onto the GF and slammy hands. In the case of my method there was only one way of fitting the hands in while retaining internal logic. You have quite a lot more freedom than that so you should be able to find something that matches to the way you and your partner think.