benlessard

Ive wasted a lot of brain power after 1D-1H and my number one conclusion is that 1D-1H-1S should be a very frequent start. 1D-1H-1S as showing 4S is seriously inefficient. IMO most system where 1D-1H-1S is 2 or 3 types of hands with seriously outperform most system where 1D-1H-1S is spades. My first inclination would be to keep 1H as inv+ or natural. 1D-1H-?? 1S bal or... 1NT 4S denies 4H

I think that 1D unbal but could be short D is odd. It make relaying the full shape impossible and your not able to raise diamonds on T1. For me these are the 2 main advantages of 1D 4+ unb. Opening 1H 1NT with a 4414 is a lesser evil. IMO the penalty of opening 2C with (4315) is just not high enough.

if responder is inv+ it doesnt change anything. if responder make a non forcing bid opener can probably make a forcing bid (2Nt maybe) to show 20+ hand forcing. So at the cost of playing the opening forcing you increase the precision on strong hand by limiting the crazyness under 1C. Is 1D-2C-3D (I guess showing something like 4H+6D and 13pts) not forcing really useful ? Also after 1D what do I do if Ive got a raise but im 0-5 ? is it 1NT ?

I should have made this clearer but in my system transfers are weak or GF and all the inv hands are in 1D. So with 0-5 3343,3352,3325,3145 etc we bid 1C-1S (transfer to NT) 0-5 hands with 4S and witouth 4H will be in 1C-1H(spades) 6 cards single suiter 0-5 are in 1C--(1NT to 2H) So 1C-1D is 4H or 6pts+. 1C-1D-2H is 18-20 with 4H (so that facing inv we are GF and facing H we are ok). 1C-1D-1H is either just 3 cards or its weaker than 18. After 1C-1D-1H we use transfers that are INV or GF H+suit. The only non forcing bid is 1C-1D-1H-1NT wich is inv 4 or 5S (denies 4H) 1C-1D-1H is a great start in my system because 1- its frequent. 2-if responder is weak we have at least a 4-3 fit so he can pass 1H. 3 if responder is inv he has many bids available. 4- if responder is GF he can transfer and bid again to show H+another suit. 1C-1D-1H doesnt work so well in polish club because responder can have a wide range of weak hands and those hand need bids that cannot be used for other things.

Ive never understood limited transfers openings, if my 1D opening is forcing and show 4H and ive got 20 pts with 6H than its clear to me that this hand fit better in 1D than under a strong club. Are most opening in Moscito forcing ?

At least this cover a problem hand, the standard 8-10 or 9-11 no majors solve no problems its just a preemptive bid. The problem is 1C-2D/2M (or by transfer) wich is GF vs 17+ but to play vs a bal hand, imo its sensible to drop this feature and use 1C for the 11-15 hands with clubs but it lead to a 3 way club type of bidding system wich is imo significantly different than PC ex after 1C-1M-2C has to be natural now and cannot be used as a gadget.

For my system and PC its a tradeoff, 1D show 4 and 2C show 6 or 1D show 2 and 2C show 5. I dont think its a close call at all. If 1D contain a balanced hand than I agree that 2C promising 6 is probably better. But I still stand by my point that its mostly the poor scheme of responses after a 2C opening that cause more problems. All things being equals I prefer to open 2C with 6C or 5C+4M than to open 2M with a 6M or 5M+4m a la Fantunes. Yes, after 2C and after a 1NT opener im a strong believer in invites and stay low. It allow you to invite agressively with 6M or 4M and keep a good degree of security. Unbalanced hands with and unknown degree of fit have a volatile value. A (431)5 hand value will highly depend on the majors fits. A hand with no support could be seen as minimum but transform into Gf with 4 trumps or with 3 trumps and the right stiff. As for the invs after my one opening, we dont have the INV 2Nt nor the round 1 limit raises. But we have the normal invitationnals bids its just that we rarely need to them compared to 11-16 style. For example xx Tx AKxxx Axxx 1H-1S-2H (where 2H show 4S+5H 11-14) 2Nt is GF so we GF, pass or bid 3H Inv. With a 3rd trumps after the 1H opening we dont have a R1 limit raise and must go through 1S with the limit raise. My posistion is that when opener is unbalanced its better to INV or not after you know opener 2nd suit. You lose the preemptiveness of the limit raise but gain more precision before committing yourself. After 1S--(2H)--?? we can bid 3H with for a limit and opener will bid 3S only with the 11-12. My views is that not being able to play 1NT is a minus. Ive always considered 2/1 with 1NT forcing to be an inferior system to plain Sayc since 1NT is often the best partscore. By keeping 1D-1Y-1NT forcing we are able to stop low when opener is 15-17 and we know wich minor is longer when its both minors, more importantly those forcing rebids allow us to be super precise when responder is GF and in the end Imps is about bidding the right game & slams, is just worth more than the case where 1NT makes and 2m goes down. Often its goes 1D-1H-3H at the other table when at our table 3H is RKC in H and opener has showned a 3451 with 15-17. Not playing a relay system I would never play 1S-1NT as forcing, would rarely open 1Nt with a 5M and would keep 1D-1??-1NT as to play. Still without relays with xx,Kxx,AKJx,Qxxx playing PC I would always open 1D not 1C and I don`t think its close. Relaying a hand is too good at imps and its the reasons why I like 1D & 1M unbalanced in the first place. I don`t think its such a good tradeoff to lose some lead directing openings just to play unbalanced 1D if you dont take full advantages of the fact that the opening is unbalanced. 1st seat open 49% of the times while its 28.5% for 2nd seat 3rd and 4th combined is only 22%. IIRC when you remove the balanced 16 & 19 to 21 a precision 1C opening is only 6-7% compared to 15% for Polish and less for my system. Its not a big deal but in precision 1D is overloaded and 1C is underloaded while its the opposite in PC. I don`t think its a good argument, whne you hold the balance of pts bidding space is precious one way or another. How you distribute it matters, its not a goal in itself but its clearly a flaw to underused the bidding space. In fact most think its a good strategy to be super-agressive vs a strong club (I dont agree) to steal space. If 1C is a "bad" opening than why would they need to be agressive ? In my system and in PC the fact that they could easily have game after the 1C opening is a deterrant to wild actions something that I consider a slight minus not a plus vs most players. Its 15-20 and its a very clever bit that ive stole from PC. In PC 1C-1D-1H is bal 12-14 or 17 bad 18 with 5M for us its bal 15-20 or 15-17 with 5M. This allow to have 2 range before reaching 1nt. For example after 1D that show 4H or many 6-8 pts and 1H that could be 3+H. 1C-1D-1NT =17-18 bal without 4H 1C-1D-1H-1S-1NT 15-16 1C-1D-1H-1S-2nt 19-20 without a 5card suit & since responder is GF bal or 6-8 we are in good shape. 1C-1D-2H = 18-20 with 4H, bal or 5C+4H the fact that balanced hand without 3H are not frequent is very useful. By using 1H that way we have 1C-1D-1H-?? 1S bal GF or inv no majors or inv with clubs 1NT INV with 4 or 5S 2C 6D INV or H+D GF 2D 4H inv or H+C GF 2H 6S inv or H+S GF this is very powerful. After 1C-1D-1S its convoluted but 1C-1D-1H is a great start for us. A couple of months ago ive switch 1C-1D-1NT to be 19-20 to have more 1C-1D-1H start but it lead to some complications so its possible we will revert to 17-18.

Even with a 1D neg there is no reasons not to switch 1H and 1S or at least play 2 level transfers. Yes 1C-2H (showing Spades) is less effective than 1C-2S for preemption but you rightside and gain extra spaces for GF hands. This allow you to be more precise elsewhere. Basically its a similar tradeoff than playing transfer or not vs a weak NT except that after In PC after 1C-(P)-?? its more likely to be your hand than after 1NT-(P)-?? because of the failure to overcall and because opener could have 18+, so rightsiding is more important than preemptiveness. So unless you are a hardcore advocate of no transfers after a weak NT I dont see why transfers are not standard in PC. After a strong clubs or a strong 2C using 2or3 something as natural is just ludicrous. If I hold a 5 or 6 card suits and some values its likely my values are in the long suits, so the balanced hand hand is more likely to have the tenaces in the suit led even if the pts are splitted evenly give a differenc of 10 pts between the hands and rightsiding become a huge winner. 17-vs 8 with both squared hand rightsiding is not a big deal. But if the 8pts hand got a 6 card suit the difference is just too important imo.

For example you could maybe drop flannery here at very little cost. 1H-1S (may or may not have 4S) (1H-1Nt = 5S) ?? 1NT= clubs or many minimum 2C = spades 2D = diamonds max or 5H+5D 2H = H maximum or at least 6 good H. basically when you have a flannery hand you start at 2C. This can make you to stop in 2C instead of 2D is less direct than 2D-4M but you win a 2D relay wich is a lot better than a 2nt relay since you may sometimes stop in 2M. when you have 25(42) 35(41) minimum you can stop in 1nt. Stopping in 1NT instead of a 61 H fit with crappy trump is also good. If you bid 2H or 2D you have some extra goodies or extra shapes. You get back the 2D opening for something else but you are a bit stuck with the 3532 since partner will bid 2C with 4clubs quite often. also rightsiding 1NT should be good enough to compensate the 1H-1S-(X). We use 2NT for a crappy preempt in a minor or both M 3 or 4 losers (when we dont forget to bring the acbl defense). Using 3m as decent preempt allow you to make better 3Nt/pass/saves & the both majors hands are often buried after a 1C opener. If you still need a balance range I suggest using the direct 2NT for the rarest range like 22-23 and used 1C-??-2nt for the more frequent 20-21. The frequency difference is quite high IIRC, for one 22-23 you get three 20-21, these are high importance imps hands. After 2C-2M we use 3D and 3H for shortness and often 3 card support, it allow us to find good 52 fit or reach 5C instead of 3NT. We use 3S for 3226 hands (with 3 trumps) or for max and 4S over 2H. bidding 4m is (430)6 with 3 in partner suit. We simply give up on slams after 2C-2M. Im glad to hear you say that. Im one of the strongest proponent of raising minors you will ever meet I consider inverted minors to be in the hall of fame of worse conventions in imps. We have 2C and 2D for raise that can be 3 card and contain a 4M. With xx Qxxx KJx xxxx I think raising D is clearly the better bid in Imps and probably good in MP too. If partner got 4H or 4C opps have a S fit and raising make life harder than 1H. I also want a D lead rather than a H lead. For us 1H doesnt even promise 4H anyway so its a no brainer. After 1D-2D or 1D-2C ive never had difficulties finding a 4-4 M fit and untangle the stoppers situation since slams are somewhat rare and the opener is unbalanced. Note that since our 1NT and 2NT are clubs we have 4 diamonds raise that are not limit raises. 2C/2D (only 3 trumps or 4 trumps no short) 3C/3D (4 trumps and shapes) and we use the 1H relay when we are gf unless its a huge fit or we have a void. A funny hand in this weekend tournament AKxx xx Axxxx Jx vs xxx void QJTxx AQ9xx 1D-1H-3H where 3H showed a void in H (our splinters are always voids in any circumstances) we were "pushed" and made 6D since the K of D was onside, even if the K of D is offside I could still hope for KT or Kxx of club onside.

I assume that by a low you meant a middle spot, since the lowest H could be seen as club void ?

Why is 1D 12-19 and not 12-21 ?

I initially wanted to post a reply in http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/69535-defence-against-defence-against-polish-club/ but felt it was better to start a new thread.I wanted to give my opinion (sometimes without arguments) on the pros and cons of precision (PRC) and VS Polish clubs (PC) and speak of my system. My system is a hybrid of PC and precision, we are using a weak 1NT (12-14) and use the strong 1C at 15 so all balanced hand are open 1C or 1Nt and 1D is unbalanced with 4D like PC but our 1C is always "strong" like precision. One caveat is that I have never played Prc or PC at a serious level. Im starting from 2nt and go down. 2NT = I really hate 2NT 19-21 or 20-21. For standard players I believe 2C for 20-21 or any GF and 2NT for 22-23 is a lot better. For the PC & prc I believe almost anything is better than 2NT 20-21. Yes I know that Meckwell keep 2nt for 19-21. 2M = I like frequent and wide ranging plain weak 2. I see nothing wrong with them except that they have a high variance when you play vs weaker teams. 2D = I like plain weak 2d, but i guess could play ranges around 8-12, Wilkosz or multi. I dont like mini-Roman, 2D precision,flannery or to use 2D to fix holes, since the frequency is going to be low and it will require special continuations that dont repeat anywhere else in the system. But overall I don't think its that relevant one way or another. 2C= I play that 5C+4M is possible, the standard precision responses scheme is simply awful. I think transfers are likely to be a good methods. The new version of what is 2D = GF relay or INV with long Maj (paradox responses) or inv with clubs 2M = INV NF with 4 or 5, opener need 3 (and a min) to pass with 2 or less he scramble to 2S,2NT,3C with a min. 2NT natural INV (could be long D inv) 3C preemptive rest is GF. 2C-2D ?? 2H i refuse a H inv may accept a S inv 2S = I refuse S INV but accept a H inv. rest is non miminimum so GF usually showing specific shortness. So basically when responder is GF he can use 2D GF relay but instead of knowing lenght he know opener shortness (leaking information however). (2C-2D-2M-2NT is GF) Its a compromise but this allow us to inv with 6M and inv with 4or5M and stop in 2M. We do rightside a lot and we often play in good 43 fits. So yes we could be 2c going down while 2M makes but we are not missing games or play the wrong games too often. My 2 current partners think 2C with 5C+4M is no problem at all, my previous partner even thought that our 2C was a good winner. For me 1D show 4 and 2C show 5 is simply a lot better than 1D show 2 and 2C show 6. If you already have a balanced hand range in 1D than I can understand that the cost of using 1D for (41)35 or (42)25 is lower but for us and for PC it make little sense to use 2C for 6+C imo. ----------------------------------------------------------- 1NT= 12-14 may have 5M at any vul. This is our biggest weakness. 1NT vul is a little bit annoying but far worse is to open 1NT with 5M, its clearly where we loose most of our imps. Note that 1C with a weak nt (but forcing) is far from safe also. I feel precision 14-16 range and a 1D non forcing is a good winner here. 1S = for us its 11-14 or 18-21 always unbalanced, 5(422) is unb If its good enough to overcall its good enough to open may seem logical but I think opening many 8-10 count got a lot of drawback. You ll need a monster to GF over them, and pass and overcall become non-existant. For quite a while I had the feeling that top players are opening too light or have too many "non-suits" openings, ive discussed this with a friend and he suggested that like poker if the players are too agressive being after them is going to be overly advantageous, about 2 month ago ive sent an email to Pavlicek to ask if 1&3rd seat will have a big advantage over 2and 4th and he kindly did it ... www.rpbridge.net/9x35.htm wich somewhat confirmed my views. 1st seat open 49% of the times while its 28.5% for 2nd seat 3rd is 17.5 and 4th is 4.5. 1&3rd are the opener 65% of the times compared to 35% for 2nd and 4th seats, this is a huge difference, but in the end 1st and 3rd seats are not even significantly ahead in the scores. Either... The top players bidding isnt as good as we think. preempting doesnt work as much as we think we are leaking too much info when we open We open too light (not enough safety) or some other reasons. My view is that there is a massive increase in openings that dont suggest a suit or a lead and dont consume space, these are leaking pts because they are giving too much options to LHO and cannot be raised easily so they dont block RHO. These bids have a low annoyance effect and leak informations but dont always buy the hands. I also think that opening too light with 2/1 scheme cause problems. These 2 points may also explain a bit why Fantunes system got success. Anyway for reals suits 10-15 or 11-17 look like good ranges to me but they are still wide enough to need a gadget to break the ranges (a la Gazilli, wich is ok but not great imo) or will face some invites that will put you one too high. 11-14 or 18-21 are tighter ranges and we rarely play at the 3 level. A splitted range and unbalanced 1M is something that must be tried rather than explained since its too different than standard methods. 1H= imo playing Kaplan inversion/1S relay if legal is a must, for us its among our best sequences 1H-1S (relay)--?? 1NT=4 clubs 11-14 or 18-22 2C = 4D 11-14 or 18-22 2D =6H 11-14 or 18-22 2H = 4S+5H 11-14 rest is 5H+4S 18-22 With 5H and the proper pts count for 1NT I dont think its right to always open 1NT (like we do). ---------------- 1D= for us its 4D unbalanced 11-21. 1- keeping a range of 11-15 or 11-17 for 1D is IMO super lame. I just dont understand opening 1C with 17-21 and primary diamonds. In about 10 years not once I have seen 1D all pass where we missed game. After 1D-1M- you have a lot of bids to show 16+ hands with long diamonds. Keeping the jumpshifing or reversing as non forcing is not worth a lot imo. The main advantages I see to a limited 1D is 1D-1nt psych. Also normally you have space to fit everything show extras and stop in 2D/2M. Keeping 1D-1H-1S or 1D-1S-2H as forcing could be artificial should be good enough but there are other solutions. we are using 1D-1H-?? 1S/1NT/2C as artificial and forcing here so we fit a lot of things in 1D-1H. 1D-1H-?? 1S= clubs any strenght (may have 4H) 1NT is asking for longest minor. 1NT= 6D any strenght or 5D+4H 11-14 (2C is range check) 2C = 11-14 or 18-21 with 4S 2D 4D+4S 15-17 2H 4D+4H 15-17 1D-1S as showing 5s is pretty good. 1D-1NT showing 6c is also nice. 1D-2C as raise 5-7 or GF 1D-2D as 8-10 ---------------- For 1C I think 16+ unb and 17+ if balanced is too rare. In general I think you should open 1C significantly more often than you open 1Nt. I also think 1C is better for balanced hands than for unbalanced hands. Balanced hands are less vulnerable to preemption and need more space to let partner describe his hands. However if your balanced is too weak (11-12) the chance to buy the hands is not good enough and all you have done is help the opponents adn took some risk if you were vul. So I like that our bal 15+ are in 1C. Another idea for balanced hand is to be sound in 1st/2nd seat but compensate in 3rd/4th seat. I think playing transfers or switch over a strong club/polish clubs is just too good to be true. I prefer weak or GF transfers but any type of transfers/switch will give you a good edge over plain prc or pc methods. 1C--2D (showing 6H) 2H all pass 1C--1NT (6C) 2C--?? 2D gf bal 2H stiff D 2S stiff H 2Nt stiff S these are huge for finding slams. Things i hate 1C-1NT natural forcing or not is just awful. 1C-1D is 0-7 or 0-5, I prefer to show shapes first and than pts not the other way around. 1C-2y natural forcing or not. Things I like 1C-1D-1M could be 3 cards non forcing like in polish clubs. It maximize the number of sequences when responder is GF and allow you to stop low when responder is broke and hold 3-4 cards there. It will only work if the opener is often a balanced hand wich is the case in my system. I like to use 1C-1D-1NT as 18-20 (19-20 in our case)

The vul is wrong for X so 2H is normal. Note that most of the times its not a big deal to double with 3 spades, if partner pass 1nt its 1ntx and if he pull to a minors than hes miminum and you dont have game anyway. Its when its the opps that pull that you may have a problem. [hv=d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1h1s1nd2hpp2s]133|100[/hv] Now its likely that partner would like to know if you have 2 or 3 trumps.

For me a passed hand bid a new suit at the 5 level got to show a spades tolerance 100% of the times, overcaller will often pick 5M depending on the ace of trumps, he want to avoid a t2 ruff.

5H look totally normal. It will show a spade tolerance because of the failure to overcall over 1D.

Weve tried many stuff but i think its simpler to keep it symmetric. transfer in a maj and bid is GF. 1NT-2D-2H-?? 2S= 4+clubs 4+hearts 2NT = single suiter or other type of hands. 3C = 5D+4H 3D = 5H+4/5D low short 3H = 5H+4/5D high short 3S = 2542 after 1NT-2D-2H-2S-2NT-?? we use the same scheme but with clubs. 3C = 5C+4H 3D = 5H+4/5C low short 3H = 5H+4/5C high short 3S = 2524 With spades its similar except that 52(42) are in other type of hands. We have a rule that if opener bypass 3NT quickly hes promising a sure M fit, if he punt under 3NT and bid over 3Nt hes got minor fit. Most of our bid under 3NT are looking for the best game (weak nt = game before slam is more important)

I also recall reading on the bbo forum that there was a clever 2 under transfers scheme that I tought was superior to the ETM scheme.

Ive played no transfers for a couple of years and its awesome for a big field tournament, its also nice when you play vs a weaker team that play 15-17 not only it protect you by having the same declarer. 1m-1M vs 1NT-transfers but 1NT-2M (to play) is a tough nut to defend against. I now play with transfers but its somewhat similar to your scheme. We avoid 1NT-2C-2S vs long H inv and we control opener responses to 2C. 1NT--??? 2C = all the inv, all the both M hands or both m hands, the Romex stayman hands. Can be a D signoff 2D= transfer could be 4 if 4H+5m GF (weak or GF never inv) 2H = transfer could be 4 if 4H+5m GF (weak or GF never inv) 2S= inv 5or+ Spades 2NT = Clubs inv or better 3C = D inv or better 3D = puppet 3H = 13(54) 3S = 31(45) 2C is all the inv, all the both M or both m hands , the Romex stayman hands. 2C--?? 2D almost forced. 2H min and 4 or 5H rest is max with supper accept in D. after 1NT-2C-2D-?? Pass= D signoff 2H= inv with 5 or 6H (we play 2H not 3H/2Nt) 2S= Inv with 4S(may have 4H) (1nt-2S is inv with 5/6S) 2NT = Inv no M 3C = Romex stayman rest is single suiter D So all the inv hands we can find the fit and stop in 2M if opener is minimum. We have all the transfers for GF hands (transfer in M can be 4M+5m)and we have some bids for both minors. We can signoff in 2D but not in 3m. We dont have classical garb stayman wich is inferior to the D signoff anyway. We cannot handle the (4441) Using 1NT-2D for only the 5H+ is poor, the frequency is too low for such a precious bid. Using 1NT-2H for 4S+5m or 5S is better than using it just for 5S (non inv) hands. Minors signoff at the 3 level are overated especially those in transfers.

A side question would be Unfavorable (1S)---?? assuming that your hand allow you to bid 3H fairly safely wich type are you more likely to have ? 1-a hand with awesome trumps/ 2- a mix hand of great trumps and pts 3- good trumps and vgood pts ? KQJTxxxx and nothing else KQJT98x and a side ace KQT98xx and AQ+AJ I think case 2 is way more likely, however It doesnt mean that using 3H for these most probable hands is logical.

Its all a matter of range and agreements but if we look at some goals IMO There is mainly 4 sensible goals for a IJS/SJO 1-reaching game .. your afraid that partner pass your simple overcall so these SJO cover strongs hands and overlap with X and bid (17-20). partner as advancer vs a simple overcall may now pass 8 count more easily. 2-your afraid opps will find a cheap save over your game. This should only be used at unfavorable (1D)--2S (when your unfavorable) you aiming at 4S but want to make it harder for them to compete or sac (great 14 to 18) the frequency is a lot higher than SJO 3- X and bid is now a flexible hand and denies a great suit. This should only be applied when they open 1m. (1D)-X-(P)-1S (P)-2H 35?? or a ?5?4 with 16-19 pts (obviously X and cue is no longer 100% Gf) 4- You think preempting with weakish hand is pointless and give away too much information for the odds of buying the hand. So these "preempts" are similar to Trent weak 2's. I recommend sticking with case one its simpler even if the frequency is low and you lower a bit when its a jump in 2M. Not vul giving away the preempts would simply be unfathomable for me and my partners.

Im not sure a higher percentage mean more accurate bidding, there is a sweet spot somewhere. Assuming that we are only looking at small slams in imps, in a perfect world you would like to bid all 51% or better slams and none of the 49% or less slams but you will always have a fair amount of slams that are around 50% (assuming the other pair will always be at least in game). Its hard to estimate a curve but lets just say that 1/3 of the slams are cold 1/3 are 75% and 1/3 are around 50% and you bid no slams that are 40% or less. Everyone would be very proud to have this "curve" wich contain very few slams under 50%. But you will still have a 25% failure rate. Its just a guess but I feel that if your slams success rate is higher than 75% you are probably not agressive enough in your slam bidding. I see a good amount of slams that need... a 3-2 break 68% either finesse working 75% pickup the Q of trumps in 9 card fit 53% or 58% if you can deal with a 4-0 break. Im probably biased here, slam that are cold are often bid at both table, easy to play and easy to forget while the non-cold slams are more suspenseful so they will leave a bigger impression.

If we look at 1S-3S (limit) 4D-4H (4H is cue, not last train) its counter intuitive that 4H show a club control but denies a H cue, people who are thinking in term of rules will see this as one more exception to learn and probably decide that its an exception that is not worth it. But players who think about the goal of the auction and not just about showing their hand will quickly understand why 4H got to show a C cue rather than a H cue. Sure theyll make a mistakes at first but sooner or later they will need to draw cuebidding inference anyway so might as well learn to do them right at the start. Once you and your partner start thinking this way there is a lot of cases that you and you partner will be on the same wavelenght automatically.

The bidding somewhat suggest clubs are 2-2 and the D are 54 but its nowhere near enough to compensate for the restricted choice effect. I assume 2C was artificial or 1NT could have 4S otherwise passing 1NT is poor.

For many years Ive discussed these cases on bbo. Im not suggesting these methods are standard but the mechanics is simple and should be easily understood by any serious partnership. Just think about the auction a little bit more and look at these examples and you will see that im not resulting. 1S-1Nt 3D-4D for me its clear that 4D should show a S tolerance in fact most bids that bypassed 3NT should show a S tolerance while 3S should tend to deny a S tolerance.If you just have a D fit and stiff S you should punt with 3S or use and artificial cheapest bid if you like gadgets. Keeping 3NT in the picture by bidding under 3NT is just common sense and isnt a complex method. 1NT--2C 2H---3D (GF natural 5/6D+4M but the M is not knowned) ?? same here you need 4S to bypass 3NT so 3S should denying 4S not show 4S. Unless you have a perfecto hand with good D support. 1D-1S 2H-4H Its noob bridge to wait to have 4H to reverse in 2H. So for 4H either responder wait too long to have a 5S+5H or just use the common sense agreements that you need a D tol to bypass 3NT. If you dont have a willingness to play 5D why are you bypassing 3NT ? 1Nt--2H 2S---3D ?? again 3S should denying a S fit while most bid over 3NT should show a S fit. Its ok to have some bids that bypass 3NT without a spade fit but these should be super fit in the 2nd suit and be mostly perfecto hands that aim at 6m. 2C-2D (waiting) 2S-3D (natural) 3H-?? here again 3S should denies 2S and a H fit and mostly aim at 3NT, while bid that bypassed 3NT should suggest majors. 1D-1S 3D-3H (3H doesnt promise 4or5 H) ?? again 3S should suggest S shortness while 4m should show a S tolerance.

For me its just common sense when im at 3D or 3H. Bids that bypassed 3NT show a strogn interest in slam or 5m. 4m got to be a self sufficient suit or natural with a fit im partner suit. If opener is looking for a stopper/for 4S or hes got so-so clubs all he has to do is bid 3H. 3H tend to deny a D fit not show one. After 3D-3H-?? the same logic applies. Without 4S and no stopper ill bid 3S (punt to keep 3nt in the picture) With a stopper ill bid 3NT and the rest is available to show 4S or 5D+5C or awesome diamonds.