STAYMAN

STAYMAN

This is an artificial response of 2♣ to 1NT, asking the 1NT bidder to name a four card (or longer) major if he holds one, or otherwise to rebid 2♦. 3♣ over 2NT may be played similarly.

The term Stayman means nothing more than the above. It is open to partnerships to have additional agreements, such as whether2♣ promises a four card major, which suit is shown if both majors are held, what the rebids after Stayman are, or whether Stayman applies after 1NT or 2NT overcalls or rebids.

Promissory Stayman:

The 2♣ response guarantees four or more cards in at least one major. This can be shown on convention cards as ‘Prom’.

Non-Promissory Stayman

The 2♣ response does not guarantee four or more cards in at least one major. This can be shown on convention cards as ‘Non-P’. It is sometimes known as ‘Stayman in Weakness’.

Five Card Stayman

The 2♣ or 3♣ response asks for five card majors, 2♦ or 3♦ denying one. Sometimes the 2♦ or 3♦ response shows a four card major and opener rebids 2NT or 3NT without one. One version is often called ‘Puppet’ Stayman.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF NORTH AND OTHERS

July 2008: RESPONSIBILITIES OF NORTH AND OTHERS

Although there is no law which states that North is in charge of the table it is conventionally assumed that North is. Consequently North is responsible for

a) Ensuring that the correct boards are being, or are about to be, played
b) Ensuring that the correct pairs play them
c) Filling in travellers correctly and neatly so that they are easily readable
d) Ensuring that the lead card column is completed
e) Not putting a question mark by a queried score but bringing the anomaly to the Director’s attention during the session so that the matter can be sorted out by the relevant pairs
f) Showing each traveller to partner and opponents so that they can confirm the result
g) Passing the boards to the next playing or relay table.

Opponents (conventionally East) are responsible for checking that actions a) to f) are carried out.

CHANGE OF CALL

June 2009 CHANGE OF CALL

I draw your attention to a change in interpretation about a change of call. It is now assumed that ‘pause for thought’ is from the moment of realisation and, when in doubt, is to be interpreted generously. So if a player puts down a bidding card, looks around the room and then notices that card, possibly because of a question or an alert, he is allowed to change it if he does so immediately from that moment of realisation so long as the call was inadvertent. However he still cannot change it if his partner has called.

Correct an Explanation

MARCH 2009: WHEN TO CORRECT PARTNER’S INCORRECT EXPLANATION

Declarer or dummy must wait until the end of the auction before correcting partner’s incorrect explanation. However, the correction must be given before declarer’s LHO selects his lead card. If the explanation’s start is so slow that LHO has already selected a card, that card can be replaced. A defender must wait until the end of play before correcting partner’s incorrect explanation and declarer, if he considers that he has been damaged, should call the Director. Please also note that partner’s incorrect explanation is unauthorised information which must not be used.

Incorrect Explanations

February 2009: WHEN TO CORRECT PARTNER’S INCORRECT EXPLANATION

Declarer or dummy must wait until the end of the auction before correcting partner’s incorrect explanation. However, the correction must be given before declarer’s LHO selects his lead card. If the explanation’s start is so slow that LHO has already selected a card, that card can be replaced. A defender must wait until the end of play before correcting partner’s incorrect explanation and declarer, if he considers that he has been damaged, should call the Director. Please also note that partner’s incorrect explanation is unauthorised information which must not be used.

January 2009

January 2009 REVOKE

QUESTION

A defender does not follow suit and partner immediately asks if he has no cards of that suit. He corrects the revoke by playing a card of the suit led and his incorrectly played card becomes a major penalty card. However, as a discard, it is probably a part of a partnership agreement. What should happen?

ANSWER

Law61B3 now, as a result of the last update of the Laws, indicates that a defender may ask his partner (at the risk of creating unauthorized information) if he has revoked. However if the incorrectly played card is a part of a partnership agreement as it probably is the infringer has passed (probably accidentally) unauthorized information which must not be used by his partner. A director, if called, should

a) inform both pairs of such a possibility
b) ask them to continue playing
c) call him at the end of the hand if they think that anyone has been damaged.