Thank you all for your replies. I got some good ideas from those rescources. My current thought is this: 1♦ = 0-7 OR 13+ 1♥ = 5+ hearts, 8-12 points 1♠ = 5+ spades, 8-12 points 1NT = 8-12, no 5 card suit 2♣ = 5+ clubs, 8-12 points 2♦ = 5+ diamonds, 8-12 points 2♥ = 6+ hearts, 0-7 points 2♠ = 6+ spades, 0-7 points 2NT = 13+ balanced 3♣ = 6+ clubs, 0-7 points 3♦ = 6+ diamonds, 0-7 points The 1 Diamond bid would be made when the responder is either sure that there are points close to game even across from the balanced min, or else can not be sure of game even across from the strong option. The other bids basically assume a balanced min for the moment. The only major differences between this and WJ2005 are the two way 1♦ and that the 1♥ and 1♠ bids require 5 cards instead of 4. My reasoning was that, across from a strong hand there would be less risk of "wrong-siding" the contract, while across from a balanced minimum 1NT seemed as good a place to play as any. Does this set of responses seem reasonable to people?
