fromageGB

Posts in sequence : No hard feelings, I am just making a valid suggestion to the OP. However, perhaps your comment should be addressed to yourself ...

These sentiments are possibly normal for those who routinely open 1NT when they have a 5 card major that they would open with a different point count, but some people open 1♠ and 1♥ regardless of strength. In this style, 1NT denies a 5 card major. So the range for the 1M open is 12+ (commonly 11+ if 6 card) with NO GAP. Opener therefore can have a strong hand that needs unravelling, and the 15-16 point count range is not rare, more common than 17-18, and one of the objectives of continuations is to clarify the strength. I think you will find a number of people who use a 2♣ rebid artificially, thus removing that possibility from the available contracts. One advantage is that it does prevent a 17+ opener jumping to the 3-level and going off when responder is weak. Or do you both never jump, because after all, 17/18+ is even rarer, it's dumb to show strength, and you usually reach a reasonable spot?

I don't think bids that describe strength (point count) rather than length are dumb. I also think that if you open 1M with a 5 card suit in the 1NT range, even when balanced, then you do need to distinguish the strength, as 12-16 is far too big a range for a simple invitation. It is useful to be able to show strong opener hands artificially with 2♣, and if you are going to lose that natural minor, you may as well lose the other. So over a forcing NT you could reverse your bids and try 2♣ = unspecified 15+, sort of a weak gazzilli 2♦ = 12-14 without 6 hearts 2♥ = 12-14 with 6 hearts 3m = 15/16 and 5 card minor (don't bid 2♣ with this) Then over 2♣ responder relays with 2♦ if he has any 8+ count, and opener clarifies his strength naturally with 2♥/♠/NT with 15/16, or bid at the 3 level to show 17+. If responder is worse than that he can bid anything other than 2♦ to play. It is the same with 1♠ 1NT(forcing) of course. That gives the strength and enables sensible contracts. You lose the ability to find weak 2m 4-4 fits or 5-3 fits, but you gain the benefits of finding the major fits. That's the trade-off involved in 1NT including a 5 card major or not.

Maybe we should draw a line at this point, as it seems Vampyr writes for Spare Rib. :D

This :

Maybe you should explain this "necroed"! Of course OP means "original post" or "original poster" (either, depending on context) but apply some lateral thinking. This thread was dead and buried in 2010 but just this month a new poster fbear started the topic up again requesting views on his idea of discovering opener's 4 or 5 card major and bailing out at the 2-level, having discovered a 5-3 fit or a 4-4 fit. This post #28 in the thread now assumes the role of OP. Of course if she/he had raised a new thread there would be no misunderstanding. I guess there is an advantage in re-using old threads in that it keeps all ideas and comments relating to one topic in one place. Perhaps we should have a "topic index", and only add a new topic if it is not in the list.

Not a pointless question. If you open 1♠ you may be able to hear of 4+ card heart support, whereas if you show both suits after a 2♣ open you may find yourself in a heart slam on a 4-3 fit. If you don't bid hearts after starting 2♣, sod's law says you miss a good heart slam. I'd open 2♣ though! ♦K rather than ♦A may be a better question.

What is the general consensus of the difference between responder's possible rebids of 2NT and the 4th suit of 3♣? It seems to me to make sense that 3♣ shows a good 5 card suit, in case opener is 3-suited. 2NT would be shorter clubs, I think. But I would like to hear other opinions.

Yes. And North knows responder is happy in 6♦ but also knows that he has the ♠AK, so converts to 6NT.

Yes pass no Bidding anything looks bad. Hearts are superficially tempting, but ruffing with openers' means that I have trumps to lose, as mine are terrible. NT is possible, but unless North has no entry - doubtful at the vulnerability - we are loads off. On general "law" analysis, we may have a couple of 8 card fits and they a 9 card fit, so bidding higher is not attractive. Anybody at the 4 level is likely to go 2 off. Another factor is that in the absence of agreements, partner may well have a strong balanced hand with a couple of spades, and passing stands to gain a big score at any type of bridge.

Zel, I did it this way round because this was a simple improvement to the OP suggested method. He had 2♦ = weak 5cM or no 4cM, so with little change it becomes any 5 or no 4. The 2M bids are non-forcing, because that was the expressed requirement, to be able to find the 5-3 and 4-4 major fits when not forcing. There may well be other methods, and it would not surprise me to find that yours is the best thought out to cater for many alternative developments, but the OP expressed a desire to play "a simple version that isn't too complex". As you are aware, my opinion is that it better to not have to find a 5 card major, because there will not be one in a 1NT opening. As a predominantly MP player, my preference is to open 5 card majors. 1M is therefore gapless in strength. Major fits are key, and I am prepared to take the hit of not being able to show opener's second minor suit (if any) when weak, to be able to distinguish between 12-14 and 15/16. So please read the above merely as a simple suggested modification.

Quite a good method, that I would like to adopt. I sometimes get hands where I would like to make two bids before it gets back to partner.

Well well well. So we do make 6NT provided they don't lead spades, which is unlikely. But I think I would like a system discussion with partner. Edit - for clarity, I mean a spade lead is unlikely.

Leave the humour aside for a moment. I was implying that if you have enough strength for 1NT to have a play, say 4/5-7, then it seems a little foolish to try for a major fit that is not there. The CW remains as you were taught. Yes, you have a big miss on a hidden 5-4, and a MP miss on a 5-3, but that is your trade off for better continuations after a major open. Take your medicine. I don't think vulnerability or NT strength has much of a bearing.

That's 50% of the hands the OP is concerned about. So how is your suggestion "A much better approach"? The OP method does work, and is simple. Assume responder is invitational. If opener has a 5 card suit you are playing at the 3 level when an invitation is declined, compared with the 2 level in the modified OP's idea, and moreover you are forcing to 3NT, or 3♥ on a 4-3 fit, if opener has only 4 hearts. If you are therefore saying that responder can only bid 2♠ if he has a GF hand, then not only are you always failing to find the 5-3 fit in opener's spades when responder is invitational, you also fail when opener has hearts. I think perhaps you may like to rethink.

We seem to have agreed that if opener had 4 hearts he would have bid 2♥, so I can't see a use for checkback over 2NT. If this is an "any strength, shape showing" bid, then you already know he has 5 spades and not 4 hearts. (If 2NT would be strong, and he is not, he could bid 2♠ with 5 or 6 and then you might need to know, but then 2NT by responder acts as checkback, asking for distribution.) So over 2NT, 3♣ has to be a natural suit. Over the 3NT that follows, I bid 4NT. Happy for this to be a natural slam try, and if opener takes it ace asking, I bid 6NT if he has one missing, as he will probably have the K in that suit.

I think it also depends on related agreements. Does he have a method of showing a slam hand in diamonds if he made a "normal" reply to 2♣ (is there an "nonspecific" positive, or a waiting 2♦?) and opener rebid 3NT? If opener rebid a suit after a "normal" reply, can responder show a suit?

This doesn't seem likely, responder to an unspecified 2♣ insisting on showing 2 suits without first hearing of his partner's hand, But if he did, surely he would bid hearts first, so 4♦ as his second suit clearly allows opener to do something in a forcing environment. It seems much more likely that he has a good single-suiter than he wants opener to pass or convert to 5♦.

And what options do you have that enable you to play in 1NT when he has no major?

I assume opener has denied 4 hearts. If 2NT shows a good hand (basic hands being limited to a 2♠ bid) then I am pretty keen on a slam, so 3♣. If 2NT is any strength, I would still not rule it out, so 3♣.

I can't image making those bids without agreement as to what they and continuations mean. I assume 4♥ is a control with diamonds as assumed trumps, so on that basis ask for aces with 4NT and bid 7NT if all are there, 6NT if two, 5♦ if one. If 4NT would be natural, I bid 4♠.

I think you can modify this, and it solves most of the problems. Starting point : 1NT can include a 5 card major (5cM) Objectives : to find the 5-3 M fits; to be able to use garbage stayman Responder bids a red suit transfer when 5cM except GF{54} both majors; 2♠ and upwards = normal methods (don't need 2NT natural); otherwise passes when less than invitational unless he has a holding at least 333x and fancies garbage stayman. Otherwise when invitational (Inv) or better (GF), or with garbage, starts 2♣. 1NT 2♣ ... Opener bids : 2♦ = any 5cM or no 4cM 2M = that 4cM (♥ if both ♠ & ♥) 1NT 2♣ 2♦ ... Responder bids : Pass = garbage 2M = cheapest 3+cM, Inv only 2NT = no 3cM, Inv only 3♣ = available for minor slam tries or to play or whatever 3♦ = GF request for 5 card major 3M = GF 4cM in a {54} both majors hand (Smolen) 3NT = to play, no 3cM 1NT 2♣ 2M ... Responder bids are natural, though of course you can do other things : Pass = garbage 2NT or 2♠ (4cM over 2♥) = Inv only 3NT or 4M or 3♠ (4cM over 2♥) = GF After 1NT 2♣ 2♦ 2M ... Opener bids : Pass = that 5 card major, min, to play 2♠ over 2♥ = 5cM min, for pass or convert to 2NT 2NT = no M, min 3♠ over 2♥ = 5cM max, for pass or convert to 3NT 3NT = no M, max 4M = max 5cM After 1NT 2♣ 2♦ 3♦ ... Opener bids : 3M = 5cM 3NT = no M This does give you the invitational but game denied 5-3 fits played at the 2 level, which is better than some methods. This modification also helps in right-siding. Of course there is minor "information leakage" as called by some, but called "finding the right contract rather than potting an inferior one for a poor MP score" by others.

It shows 3+, so is hardly a leak when you can have a 4-3 fit. And as responder also bids 2♣ on practically any hand, less of a leak than 1NT 2♣ promissory and 1NT not-2♣.

OK for some people, but I prefer opener to be declarer, as there will be a minor lead round to his longer suits. If so then presumably you will not be using transfers to a major when less than invitational? I can't see what advantage this gives you, and it wrong-sides the 2M. I am not a user of 1NT with 5 card majors, so I cannot know whether this is better than normal methods or not. I prefer finding the 5-3 fits when responder is both invitational and when he is weaker.

This is more or less what I meant. You are making a X as a strength bid therefore penalty orientated, but as you will be invitational strength opener has the option of taking it out to 3NT if he has the hand.