TylerE

Hard to say in isolation. Everything matters. The auction, the lead, the play so far...

I find your Chart 1 a bit confusing. Some sort of funky interpolation going on? It shows values <0 and >100.

1♣, and if you turned the Q♣ into the 3♣ I'd still open 1♣, especially NV 3rd.

Where to start... 1m-2N is 13-15 GF 1m-3N is 16-18 GF There is no forcing minor suit raise. If that alone doesn't tell you a system had brain damage, I don't know what will.

A match. As in set it on fire. SAYC is unplayable in anything resembling serious competition. The minor suit structure is most egregious. The literal only (slight) saving grace is if you play it 100% to the pamphlet. Anything else you'd be much better served by just playing a non-brain damaged system if you're going to spend even 5 minutes making agreements.

I mean, if you're not then it's some sort of 2 way NMF. The z being (potentially) a suit is what makes xyz xyz.

OP did provide the clue. E opened, W responded.

Gotta listen to the auction. Opponents have at least, say, 15 points between them. North should be able to figure out the best his partner can have. Only 40 points in the deck.

4♣ = Game going values with equal length in the majors. That said, I'm not really a huge fan of N's double.

Normally I'd agree, but I mean, we're playing this dumb system and we have the hand, so we should. Not making the bid should deny the hand. If partner can't figure out what do to when I've shown strength in such a narrow range what we bid doesn't really matter.

If you don't bid 3N on this hand take all that crap off your card. I don't really see the problem here. A sound general principle is that making a general bid when more specific bids are readily available denies having a hand one of the more specific bids would show. So your 2♦ should be balanced only if <7 or >12 But really find some better 2♣ responses.

Just bidding 4♠ is a joke bid Phil. You could be odds on for slam opposite as little as xx xxxx xxxx Kxx.

What are you entries to dunny exactly, nige? I think your "reasonable", at least in the case of 6♣, is a gross overbid.

New suits natural and dead hands. Anything with values passes.

IMO any defense without a penalty double is unplayable against Weak NT.

Paaaaaaaaaaaaaaaass. There are hands to make offshape doubles with, this very middling 13 count is 100% NOT one of them. I would much rather overcall 1♠ than X if you told me I "had" to do something, as it at least gets me the right lead and keeps partner from going nuts with 5 or 6 hearts.

Always short diamonds. 2C rebid will ALWAYS be the minimum long club hand...a 17+ long club hand should do something different.

I think you'd be better off switching 1♣ meaning C and your 2C opener... make 2C the 3 suiter (which will be harder to defend against as unlike Precision 2D opener it's passable. Then your 1c is either strong, min balanced, or primary clubs. Maybe allow (13)=4=5 hands in 1c as well.

1♥ is absolutely obvious. 6-4 hands play well. This hand is way, way, way better than at least 30% of the hands you routinely open 1♥ on. Maybe 50%.

Stop feeding the troll and maybe it will grow bored and troll elsewhere.

Defend same as normal, whatever our agreements are. Maybe be a tad more conservative with marginal hands.

I'd hardly consider Lebonsohl esoteric or hard. Really, it's one of the more fundamental things that should be taught, in preference to such dubious (but often taught to novices) things as Bergen raises

Yes, and thus X *and then* 3N is stronger than even that.

No matter hwo you look at it, there are auctions that could be worked on that are about 10,000 times more likely to occur than this one.

A direct 2N would be like 17-20, so X and 2NT something like 21-24. A direct 3♣ is probably the pragmatic bid, showing (obviously) a suit and maybe 14-18 or so. X and 3♣ would be stronger, in theory, but those sort of auctions tend not to work well with GIB as it doesn't understand the strong unbalanced X.... as soon as you X it will aLways and forever assume you have support for all unbids.