fromageGB

There is no problem with the comment you heard other than the "weak" constraint. I too play 2♠ as minor suit stayman asking for a 4-card minor, 2NT as a compulsory transfer to clubs, and 3♣ as a compulsory transfer to diamonds. However, one of the advantages of transfers is that you can show a long suit and then continue with strength, or something else to show. Any of these bids can be made with slam-interested hands. If I think I specifically want 4 card support for my long suit, then i bid 2♠ and give up on slam if opener bids 2NT (denying one). If I am happy with 3-card then I will start with a transfer. Continuations depend on partnership understandings, and you will never explore those if you play with only robots. I think to develop your understanding of the game it is essential to play with people until you find one who is prepared to put more into the game to get more out of it.

In the absence of a 3-suiter bid I agree with you, apart from the 6 card minor. I see no problem with 1m : if partner cannot reply you are unlikely to be missing anything. If you feel you are too strong for that, then 2♣ (or your strong general purpose bid) is more likely to get you to the correct spot.

If you have no forcing strong 3-suited bid, then I agree it seems feeble to open and play at the 1-level. But a real 3-suiter bid allows you to exploit the shape.

You used to play 2NT with two singletons, then, but found it didn't work very well?

I would also add that I don't think transfer completion with three cards is that common. I play it as 2 or 3 and I have come across that more. Agree with Paul about the 1♠ response, and responses of 1NT/2♣/2♦ are often artificial. After all, opener can be a doubleton in either minor, and if you did want to "support" you can do so after a 1♠ response with practically no loss of pre-emptivity, while if you did have a weak long minor, jumping to 3m is much more effective.

I think the best explanation is "just come round this side of the table and have a look at my hand!"

Well, I believe you have to give the number, such as "may be as few as two". "Short" to me implies singleton or void, and you say that is not your method.

If partner would normally expect you to bid a 4 card major first, then the problem comes when he does have a 4 card heart suit but fails to mention it because he "knows" you don't. A similar problem is that he may be bidding a 3 card suit hoping that if you have spades guarded, you can bid NT. If you don't, you can revert to clubs. Now when you bid 3♥ or 4♥ you are going to rapidly get out of control, as you need to ruff spades.

It IS another name for non-forcing. "Forcing" means that systemically partner cannot pass. "Non-forcing" means "not forcing". If you open 1M and your system says that a 1NT reply may be passed, then that is not forcing. We are digressing, however.

I vote for showing the suit bid, because it seems logical that it should be lead directing. When opponents remove the double to their real suit, a further double by opener is now takeout. If the "pass or correct" bid is followed by two passes, nothing is stopping responder from a reopening takeout double.

Surely this discussion on possible advantages/bias is relevant only when considering a change in law. As it is the law seems quite definitive : a bid is not a subset of pass, therefore not allowed under the law. Maybe the law should be changed to allow anything that is not inconsistent with pass, ie overlapping, as it would make for better bridge, but that is a different matter. Please excuse this post from someone not qualified in the matter, but it seems to me that until a law is changed, the law should be upheld.

If you are talking about a relay method after 1m for a "standard" that people will play with casual partners, I think this is impossible. Methods are far too complex for anyone but dedicated partnerships. If you are talking about a "standard" transfer method after 1♣ then I expect a simple basic one might emerge, but there are so many possibilities that most partnerships will be rolling their own.

There are two things to blame here, the most important being the scoring method. If NT and majors mainly score better then you need to investigate them as possible contracts, rather than minors, and sometimes there is insufficient space to do everything, given a limited hand. The second is system. Driven by the first factor, many people use bids of a minor completely artificially in an effort to resolve strength, or major fits. Both have been espoused in this thread, eg 1M 2♣ (strength) and 1m 1M, 1NT 2m as checkback or new minor forcing (majors), or "XYZ" similarly. You CAN do something about this second if you wish, and have natural minor rebids, but only at the cost of playing something currently non-standard and not appropriate to this forum. Improving your minor bidding can come later, and anyway that is not a problem with 2/1 per se.

Of course there are ways, and no intermediate should be without one in their partnership agreements. However, without such agreement you have to adhere to what is expected for a 2♥ bid, and if that is 6-9hcp then so be it. Pass if you are weaker. This is not to say that you should simply add up the hcp. As always, you have to consider it in the context of the bidding. If your hand is ♠Kx ♥Qxx ♦xxx ♣xxxxx Then this is not just 5 hcp. That K of spades is probably on the right side to take a trick; a Q is normally a "soft" value, and you would discount Qs in side suits a little, but here in partner's suit it is pulling its weight. Overall this is a good 5 and it is reasonable to treat this like 6hcp, and bid 2♥. Move either of those honours to a different suit, and no, don't do it.

An interesting expression. How many corners does your globe have?

Playing "system on" is an excellent treatment, with X meaning "I would have bid that", to any natural overcall. If 2♦ (eg) uninterrupted is a transfer to hearts, then so it is after an overcall. If 2♣ is stayman, then double after (2♣) is "I would have bid that". You still have transfers to all 4 suits. A transfer to their suit is made with a game strength hand with a four card major (or both majors). You do not want to X (ie Stayman) and let partner flounder and pass when 4th seat bids (3♣), as you need to let him know of your strength and shape. Uninterrupted he completes the transfer (bids 3♣ here) to deny club stops, and now you both bid 4 card suits upwards (majors of course, but also diamonds if you want - very useful as a possible escape if there is no major fit and insufficient stops for NT). If he does not complete the transfer, therefore showing stops, he bids 4 card suits upwards, or 3NT if he does not have one. If he bids 3♠ and your only major is hearts, you bid 3NT as he has shown a stop. If 4th seat bids (3♣) then on the same principle, a double from him could have the standard meaning of "I was going to bid that", and you bid exactly as you would without the interruption, but it makes sense for bids now to show stops "happy in 3NT" as before, and pass to replace the 3♣ bid without stops, while double is out and out penalty. If he passes, you have the option of doubling for penalty. Transfers are much better than Lebensohl. On the contrary, because when you do not have game it is vital to show/play in your suit, and all the more reason to transfer to make the presumably stronger opponent lead away from his hand.

Without "playing anything fancy" you can bid nothing other than 2♥ or 3♥, and I reckon you are not strong enough for 3♥. If you bid 2♦ be prepared to play there in a 4-2 fit.

If you can post the question in English you will get a proper reply. The question as translated by google is "parity signals", which are cards played when following suit that indicate "odd or even". This is very common, referring typically to length in the suit being played. If you are asking about what I know as "prism signals and discards" that show parity in all suits together, then I believe it is allowed. There is nothing encrypted about it, as you can explain when asked, and declarer himself can use the information to work out your defender shapes.

As always, it depends on your agreements. #1 While 8 cards is standard, it is a preempt (as most play it) so it may be more, or fewer, depending on circumstances. For example, with a heart shortage and weak, I may open 4♠ on 7 cards if I feel sure they would find a heart fit had I opened 3♠, especially green v.red. #2 Irrelevant if you treat it as a preempt - you think going off will be a good score. If you play 4M as constructive and partner may be looking for slam, then you should have an agreement. #3 Never 11+ (if you treat it as a preempt). Your normal style will have agreed that 1M is 12 hcp and 5 cards, or 11 hcp and 6 cards, for example, and if you ignore that you can easily miss a slam. #4 sorry, can't help

But if you play an unbalanced 1♦ with exactly the same methods over a weaker 3-suiter, then there is no memory needed for 2♦. 1♦ 3-suiters happen frequently enough that the methods are well engrained.

If you want an oddball reply ... For me this is a 3-suiter open, with a major shortage, so I have available 1♦ for up to 20hcp, and 2♦ for 21+. The JT in spades, and the void, make it a touch better than would be expected for a normal 20 hcp 4144, so I upgrade to 21 and open 2♦. This is Ekren weak both majors, or the strong 3-suiter. Responder picks his best major of 2M unless seeking game on the weak option, when he bids a general 2NT inquiry or invites in one of the majors. Here if it is both majors I am not interested in spades, so make a game try in hearts by bidding 3♣. 3NT from opener shows a 3-suiter short in hearts, and then we just pick a nominal trump suit and find opener's strength range. We are a level higher than after a normal 2M, but the strength indicates slam is not unlikely, so we use the same methods but a level higher than normal. 2♦ - 3♣ 3NT - 4♠ I have no real intention in playing in spades, as I will probably convert to 6/7NT eventually (I know we have 34hcp minimum), but with this suit I get surefire knowledge of whether the ♠Q is an entry. 4NT(21-23hcp) - 5♣(next step asks singleton or void short suit) 5♥(void, as 5♦ is singleton) - 5NT("ace asking") 6♠(OK, funny method, but this is 0 or 4 out of 5, ie the 3 aces and king of spades, as I have the Q) - 6NT 6NT has to be to play, as we don't ask for side kings when an ask commits to grand. I know we have 34-36 hcp, and I have 2 entries with diamonds and spades, so can get the hearts running, but we do lose (probably) that ♥Q. Other than that, I have 15 tricks. Edit - corrected 4♣ typo to 5♣

We can't offer concrete suggestions until you have answered Tramticket's questions, but to follow up Stephen Tu's excellent summary, I really think you should distinguish between 3 card support and 4 card support. That's normally a whole trick difference. Not only does it help opener decide on game, or slam investigations, but it is vital in knowing how to deal with any opposition interference. Personally, I also think 10-12 is too wide a range for a bid at the 3-level (unless it can be resolved, in which case it is not wide enough), as opener has to make an immediate game decision. The difference between 10 and 12 could be a trick. All else being equal, I like to have these bids just a 2-point range.

Late edit to the above : I see I have duplication in 1♠ 2NT, 3♣ 3♦ : 3NT and 4♣ meaning the same thing. Oh well. How about 3NT = 4 card diamond support in poor hand, and 4♦ is a good hand?

Back to the original question... You haven't said whether 1♥ 2NT denies four spades. Assuming it does, then you need opener to be able to bid a second suit (4+cards), and responder needs to be able to bid a 4 card suit of his own. Ideally, responder should should be able to show a strong hand with slam interest should opener have a minor fit, and/or, opener should be able to express a slam suitable hand (probably top end 14/15) to a discovered minor fit. 4NT would have to be the default contract to play should the other hand not accept a slam invitation, and prefer this to 5m. A simple "natural" approach is 1♠ 2NT : 3♣ = relay, denies 5 hearts, denies 5 spades, will have a 4 card suit somewhere 3♦ = 5 card 3♥ = 5 card 3♠ = 6 card in a 6{3xx}, ie no 4 card suit 3NT = 5 card major in a 5{332}, ie no 4 card suit As you are in a game force, all are unlimited except for 3NT, so that should be limited. 11-13 fits, while 14/15 could bid 3c initially, or perhaps some range in this shape is covered by a 1NT open. Continuations are obvious over everything but 3♣, and to this responder could bid : 3♦ = 4 card and slam-suitable hand/strength 3♥ = 4 card 3♠ = 3 card support and a slam suggestion, serious/non-serious 3NT or cue bids can follow 3NT = 4 diamonds or clubs without 3 spades, and no slam aspirations 4♣ = 4 clubs without 3 spades, and slam aspirations - then 4NT by either would be to play, so 4♦ would be ace ask or slam move agreeing clubs 4♠ = 3 card support and no slam aspiration Note that as opener is limited to 15 hcp, after the 3♣ rebid he has no other 5 card suit, so a "weak" responder will probably want to play in 3NT and not look for a minor fit. 3♦ or 4♣ therefore shows a strong hand. Over 1♠ 2NT, 3♣ 3♦ : 3♥ = 4 card (responder may be x44x) 3♠ = 6 spades, no diamond fit (ie must be 6xx4) 3NT = no diamond fit, only 5 spades, not 4 hearts (ie must be 5xx4) 4♣ = 4 card (responder may be xx44) 4♦ = 4 card diamond support With similar treatment for 1♥ 2NT. (Edit 12:06 - commas and clarification added)

Don't give it a name, just call it ace asking. Whether you have 4, 5 or 6 aces is up to you.