nullve

I would ignore defences that don't distinguish between the following shapes at a reasonably low level: * 5+S4H * 4S5+H * 6+M3-OM * 5M4+m3-OM * 4M5+m3-OM None of the defences on your original list do that except the Woolsey defence with X = 4M5+m and maybe the Polish defence, whatever it is. The only defences I can think of right now that do that while keeping the penalty double, are Asptro and my own ( :blink: ) defence. That makes them superior to Woolsey as Weak NT defences IMO.

Apparently, their fert-like 2♣ opening is also known as Munksgaard's 2♣, after its inventor, Lars Munksgaard. One board where they used it in the ETC can be found on page 19 here.

The way I read is that Opener, in order to satisfy © (i), can have (5+) spades as long as he doesn't show (4+) spades. (Having a suit and showing it are not the same.)

Found this convention card when looking here for a description of the Blakset 2♠ used by Blakset-Lahrmann in this year's open European Teams Championships. Enjoy! Edit, 3 Jan 2023: The link to the CC wasn't working, so I replaced it.

Blakset's 2♠ seems to be allowed.

Yes, missed that.

System designers may disagree! Besides, if this is the sense in which the system regulators have used the verb 'show', can't it be proven that a classical Weak 2♠ is both legal and illegal? Since it shows 6 spades, it also shows 5+ spades. Then, since spades is the suit opened and the opening is not of type (a), it must be of type (b) (i) and therefore legal. Since it shows 6 spades, it also shows 4+ spades. Then, since spades is the suit opened but the opening is not of type (a), (b) (ii) or © (iii), it must be illegal. ------- What am I missing?

X

You're right. For example: It would be safer to interpret 3N as 18-19 BAL in a country like Norway, where hardly any 2/1 pair opens 1M with 5M(332) if in range for 1N anymore. I agree that it's common (and better) to play the 2N rebid as (12-14 or 18-19) BAL.

I'd expect Pass to be best at every other vulnerability. Right or wrong?

If no discussion beyond "2/1", maybe 1♠-2♣ 3N(1)-4♥(2) 5♦(3)-5♠(4) 7♥(5)-P (1) 18-19 BAL (2) 5H6+C, obviously forcing (3) diamond control (does it have to be the A?), at least no ♠A, maybe not obviously agreeing hearts (4) cue, implying 1st round control of spades (5) contract ?

P

The book explains why. (It has something to do with having 5+5 trumps rather than 13+7 points.)

1. 2♣ only (because of 3.) 2. a) GF w/ primary C b) not too unBAL, wants to relay (GF) rather than describe c) INV+ with support 3. Compared with the only conceivable (but unsystemic) alternative, 1♠: Leaks less information on game-only deals (in fact no more than if playing de Maas) and works just as well on slam deals (because essentially the same relay structure will be available).

So what is Responder supposed to do with a) 5-6 hcp and 3 H (e.g. Axx-xxx-Qxx-Txxx) b) 5-7 hcp and 3244 (e.g. Axx-xx-Qxxx-Txxx) c) 5-7 hcp and either 32(53) or 22(54) (e.g. Axx-xx-Qxx-Txxxx) d) 5-9 hcp, not-so-"weakish" minors and either 31(54) or 3055 (does xxx-x-AQTxx-xxxx qualify?) e) 5-9 hcp and 2155 (e.g. Ax-x-Qxxxx-Txxxx) ? Pass with a) and b), potentially missing a 26 or 27 hcp game opposite a standard 1♥ opener? Transfer to 2m with some of c), d) and e), intending to play there opposite "most ordinary opening hands" in what could be a 5-1 or 5-0 fit? Note that one would respond 1N with all of a)-e) (yes, even a)) in standard 2/1.

Ok

SCREAM

12 cards

Ok, maybe he would. Give Opener ♠AJ ♥5432 ♦Q32 ♣AK32 instead then.

'IJO' stands for 'Intermediate Jump Overcall'. I'm not so sure I understand the concept, because right now there seems to be a hole in the system when Overcaller * is not vulnerable (so that IJOs are not available), * has a 6c or longer unbid suit, and * has no other unbid suit, if it matters. Just to give an example: [hv=pc=n&e=skq9754ha7dj8ckt8&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1c?]133|200[/hv]

Ok, I can imagine for example something like ♠8732 ♥K ♦AKQ432 ♣32, ♠AJ3 ♥5432 ♦Q2 ♣AK32 and ♠KJ2 ♥7432 ♦ AJ2 ♣KJ2 opposite the first, second and third hand, respectively.

How is doubling with 2614 shape consistent with the description of Laurel and Hardy given here? I'd guess the correct overcall is 1N, since an intermediate jump overcall is not available NV.