glen

Since 2NT is either never passed and/or 100% forcing, I suggest that power hands pass first. That is 2NT-Pass then later double is power and passable takeout, and 2NT-Pass-3♣-Pass then later double is power and passable takeout. By passable takeout it suggests a hand with 2 or 3 cards in the suit doubled - with singleton/void in suit later doubled, bid naturally to show suit bid and flexible power hand. Over 2NT: X: Single suited based on power 3♣: ♥s and another, if both majors better/longer ♠s 3♦: ♠s and another, if both majors better/longer ♥s 3♥+ (3♥ or higher) suit bid: natural based on length, not power 3NT: Minors Over 2NT-Pass-3♣-?: X: ♥s and another, if both majors better/longer ♠s 3♦: ♠s and another, if both majors better/longer ♥s 3♥+ suit bid: natural 3NT: Minors

do you mean at the 2NT level or the 2 level?

how do they define their pass of 2NT?

what rule is that?

Agreed. For example, one can have: 2♦: flat or OM, 2♥ asks 2OM: ♦s 2M: 6+

I like it, useful, works, relatively easy. Is the name "toy" or "play a toy" or something else?

Osbourne Cox: ... You are part of a league of morons. Ted Treffon: No. No. Osbourne Cox: Oh, yes. You see, you're one of the morons I've been fighting my whole life. My whole f'ing life. But guess what... Today, I win.

It will if ideas like in the latest Bridge World of using 1x=1NT=Double as a transfer takes off

the 7-2-2-2 and 10-1-1-1 can produce my fav auction: 1m-X-XX-P-P-P with the first pass saying "you pick"

my fav double now is a 4-3-3-3 with 4 in their opening minor - having 4 in the opening minor improves the chances of advancer having 5+ in one of the three unbid suits

"Meckwell won 5 world championship" didn't hurt, and Meckwell Lite provided a fast install version.

In this scheme the 1♣ opener is overloaded (albeit still feasible without change). For example after 1♣-2♠ (overcall by evil opp)-P-P-?, which hands are you passing and which ones are bidding at 2NT or 3X? Imo (and this is very much a matter of personal preference), I would move some hand types out of 1♣, such as: 1♣: 11/12-14 balanced, OR unbalanced 11-16 with ♣s, OR any 17+ unbalanced/22+ balanced 1♦: unbalanced 11-16 with 4+♦s 1♥: unbalanced 11-16 with 5+♥s 1♠: unbalanced 11-16 with 5+♠s 1NT: balanced 14/15-17 (including hands with 5 card major) 2♣: 18-19 balanced 2NT: 20-21 balanced Q. I've thought about just playing weak twos in all four suits, which I've never seen; is this playable? A. Yes, and some have played this - for example see the two bids of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EHAA

Fred would reply but he seems busy today. See Fred's system summary here: Fred - Brad system summary usbf 2010 open

Inverted Polish Club Canape Strong Club Thanks to Dan for pointing me to the "Inverted Polish" club system - the system summary: iPolish system summary

While I was slowly writing this, the above got posted saying much the same thing. Please see: lauria-versace.pdf From page 2, note 1NT NF response for 1H and 1S openings From page 1, 1M-3♦ is a raise with any shortness From page 2, 1M-2NT, 1♥-3♣ and 1♠-3♥ are various raises

2M-2NT;-? 3♣: shortness is most important feature. 3♦ asks where, replies as features below 3♦: no shortness/no feature or solid suit --3M: pass unless solid suit --3OM: asks which 3OM: feature in OM 3M: feature in ♣s 3NT: feature in ♦s and wedding plans

This is the best I've seen in this thread

I believe the restriction of not being able to directly raise the new suit (e.g. 2♥-2♠;-3♠ would be above 3 of weak2 suit) would then require an alert of the new suit bid, and some would considered the bids to be outlawed controlled psyches - for example if playing in ACBL events see GCC, "DISALLOWED ... 3. Psychic controls (Includes ANY partnership agreement which, if used in conjunction with a psychic call, makes allowance for that psych.)"

Not legal in GCC (but see note about 3rd/4th seat in next post, which is correct), legal in super, likely legal in the clear-as-mud mid-chart mess (edit: for mid-chart, changed from likely not legal). Played by the late Barry Crane in GCC type events of his time, and thus the convention was not allowed by charts but allowed by TDs for certain partnerships. Recently featured in the ACBL Bulletin's The Bidding Box, even though it did not mention it was GCC illegal. imo, it would better to mention that it was illegal to avoid partnerships trying something they see in the Bidding Box at a tournament only to get a bad experience with ACBL regs. If allowed in GCC events I would likely play 1♥/♠-?: 2♣: ♣s or balanced, game force 2♦: ♦s (unbalanced) game force, or limit raise in major or 2♣: ♣s or balanced, game force 2♦: ♦s (unbalanced) game force, or single raise in major weak or bad constructive 2M: good constructive to limit raise

Mixed pairs would be six sessions for $450 for the pair, or $75 per person per day. If staying in the WBF camp, then its $350 for the pair, or $58.33 per person per day

but not everybody has the extra space of 2♦-2♦ and then you get: Q. wats 2♦? A. transfer to ♥s Q. didn't you already bid ♥s? A. yes Q. so how can you transfer to them? A. the same way you can say suit symbols like ♥s in example conversations P. I think 2♦ is a puppet to 2♥, not a transfer Q. maybe its a relay?

2way KRex: 2♣: weak two in ♦s or strong with fewer than 4♠s 2♦: weak both majors or strong with 4+♠s

your post is the first mention of downgrade - what are you discussing here?

For Meckwell I saw more gains with 13s upgraded into "14-16" than their 9-12 (9 when allowed) 1NT

KRex was being tricky - he said that 1♦-1♥;-2♣ was 10+ minor cards, but I'm sure that 1♦-1♠;-2♣ is just 9+ cards, since the 1NT rebid over 1♠ now shows ♥s - sadly a "unbalanced diamond" book was preempted by miles