[MickyB]

Just been thinking about this, seems better than Wolff and similar, and possibly simpler - anyone know of any existing write-ups or have their own preferred version?

[gnasher]

These are the agreements that I usually foist upon new partners:

Applies only to a 2NT rebid that shows 18-19 (ie either a jump or bid voluntarily over a sandwich intervention). [I've also agreed "Applies after any second-round non-forcing 2NT rebid by opener after responder has shown values."]

Any suit is a transfer. 3S shows clubs.

Transfer back to opener’s suit may be a signoff.

Opener gives preference only after 1m-1S; 2NT-3D – in all other auctions responder might have only four cards in his first suit.

Opener rarely breaks through strength.

Transfer then new/old suit = patterning out, may be looking for best game. eg 1D–1S; 2NT-3C; 3D-3H = 5431
Exception: 1H-1S; 2NT-3D; 3H-4C might be either shape or a cue bid, because there is no room to agree hearts below game.

Transfer to an old suit and then raise to game(eg 1m-1S; 2NT-3H; 3S-4S) = NF slam try.

Jump in new suit = autosplinter

[MickyB]

gnasher, on Jul 24 2008, 06:31 PM, said:

Transfer then new/old suit = patterning out, may be looking for best game.  eg 1D–1S; 2NT-3C; 3D-3H = 5431

Is this 5341 or 4351? I presume the former, but the latter is still possible. Also, what about 1m:1H, 2N:3H? I guess this is at least 4-4, with 3S now denying 4S and promising 3H?

Am wondering if it's better to use 3C as a puppet to 3D - feels wrong to give so much ability to show hands with diamonds but not be able to indicate a heart shortage on a 4144 or a 4135.

This post has been edited by MickyB: 2008-July-24, 18:47

[gnasher]

MickyB, on Jul 24 2008, 08:41 PM, said:

gnasher, on Jul 24 2008, 06:31 PM, said:

1D–1S; 2NT-3C; 3D-3H = 5431

Is this 5341 or 4351? I presume the former, but the latter is still possible.

I think opener would assume 5341, but you're right that 4351 is possible. Thanks for pointing out the typo, which must have been there for quite some time.

Quote

Also, what about 1m:1H, 2N:3H? I guess this is at least 4-4, with 3S now denying 4S and promising 3H?

Yes, it's 4-4. I usually play that you complete with 4-card support and bid 3NT without, but I agree that other approaches may be more efficient. The same would apply to 1♣-1♦; 2NT-3♦/♥.

Quote

Am wondering if it's better to use 3C as a puppet to 3D - feels wrong to give so much ability to show hands with diamonds but not be able to indicate a heart shortage on a 4144 or a 4135.

Possibly. Personally I'm less interested in 4-3 fits than in 5-2 fits, so I prefer to be able to show 5M-4m hands. Given that, maybe I should play:
  3♣ then 3♥ = 5 major + 4 clubs
  3♣ then 3♠ = 5 major + 4 diamonds
but for me that's a complication too far.