[kenrexford]

I have seen a recurring debate amongst people who play Meckwell, in principle, but disagree as to one specific advance. I am curious as to the "official" meaning.

1NT-2♣ shows, in Meckwell, clubs and a major. If responder passes (1NT-2♣-P-?), how does Meckwell define (1) 2♦ and (2) 2♥?

One side in the debate interprets 2♦ as natural, with 2♥ as pass-or-correct. The justification is that this approach enables a 2♦ escape (perhaps less important if Advancer is a passed hand and employs a weak 2♦ opening). The method for handling strong hands would then be the "invisible cuebid" of 2NT.

The other side of the debate uses 2♦ as the "asking bid," seeking the major, with 2♥ instead as natural. The theory here is to enable a rescue to 2♥ (again, see the caveat for weak 2♥). The theory also is supported by the refreshed ability to bid a natural 2NT, if that ever makes sense (balanced club raise???), and the cheaper auction for strong hands with a possible fit for a major.

Side one argues that a natural diamond call occurs twice as often, because 50% of the time that 2♣ is bid overcaller will have long hearts, reducing the chances of a long heart suit for advancer. Side two does not care about this, focusing more on the need for good constructive auctions when a fit presents itself. I'm sure there are other arguments on each side.

Anyone know the "official" answer? If there is not such an answer *which would be strange), any positions?

[csdenmark]

kenrexford, on Apr 15 2006, 03:57 AM, said:

I have seen a recurring debate amongst people who play Meckwell, in principle, but disagree as to one specific advance.  I am curious as to the "official" meaning.

1NT-2♣ shows, in Meckwell, clubs and a major.  If responder passes (1NT-2♣-P-?), how does Meckwell define (1) 2♦ and (2) 2♥?

One side in the debate interprets 2♦ as natural, with 2♥ as pass-or-correct.  The justification is that this approach enables a 2♦ escape (perhaps less important if Advancer is a passed hand and employs a weak 2♦ opening).  The method for handling strong hands would then be the "invisible cuebid" of 2NT.

The other side of the debate uses 2♦ as the "asking bid," seeking the major, with 2♥ instead as natural.  The theory here is to enable a rescue to 2♥ (again, see the caveat for weak 2♥).  The theory also is supported by the refreshed ability to bid a natural 2NT, if that ever makes sense (balanced club raise???), and the cheaper auction for strong hands with a possible fit for a major.

Side one argues that a natural diamond call occurs twice as often, because 50% of the time that 2♣ is bid overcaller will have long hearts, reducing the chances of a long heart suit for advancer.  Side two does not care about this, focusing more on the need for good constructive auctions when a fit presents itself.  I'm sure there are other arguments on each side.

Anyone know the "official" answer?  If there is not such an answer *which would be strange), any positions?

As well for Meckwell 2003 as 2005 2♣♦♥ are completely standard as stayman and transfers. 2NT differs acc. to version.

You can check the notes(28/2003 - 2/2005) from here: Meckwell Club

[kenrexford]

Overcalls, please.

[csdenmark]

kenrexford, on Apr 15 2006, 11:14 AM, said:

Overcalls, please.

If you mean defensive then check cc, 5th section to the left(VS NT). As I can see there are some differences between 2003/2005.

For 2003 you can see it outlined for strong NT in FD-file.

[Free]

I play Meckwell against strong NT, but we use 2♦ to ask for the Major overcaller does NOT have. 2M is a normal P/C (♠ wants to play 3♣ or 3♥ when overcaller doesn't have ♠). This way, responder can sign off in any Major, and if you have a 9+ card fit you usually can handle 3♥ or 2♠...

This method came from the rough two's we played a while ago. Invite hands or signoff in a Major went through 2♦.

When opps double on 2♣, RDbl asks the other Major and 2♦ becomes natural.