[jillybean]

One of the first rules I memorized is 1m (1om) 1M promises 4 and 1m (1♥) 1♠ promises 5.

How about this instead;

1m (1any) 1M promises 4+
1m (1any) X shows values and denies 4♠
1m (1any) 1nt could shows min values, deny 4♠ and show a ♥ stopper.

[cherdano]

Hehe, this is an advanced/expert question in fact. Many in fact play that 1m (1H) 1S = 4+ and 1m (1H) X = any hand with <4 spades and no clear bid (takeout for minors, or balanced without stopper). However, playing IMPs there is a lot to be said for the traditional approach. If it goes 1C (1H) 1S (4H), then a lot of IMPs ride on the decision whether to bid 4S or not, and knowing whether partner has four or 5+ spades helpes a lot... The modern approach has the advantage in constructive auctions, as you don't have to make up a bid with a hand like KJx xxx AJxx Qxx after 1C (1H).

[P_Marlowe]

Modify

1m (1any) X shows values and denies 4♠

too

1m (1any) X shows values and denies 4 cards in any major,
which could have been bid on the 1 level.

This style is playable and not uncommon, but not standard in
North America, and for that matter not standard in Germany.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Echognome]

jillybean2, on Aug 14 2008, 07:57 AM, said:

One of the first rules I memorized is 1m (1om) 1M promises 4 and 1m (1♥) 1♠ promises 5.

How about this instead;

1m (1any) 1M promises 4+
1m (1any) X shows values and denies 4♠
1m (1any) 1nt could shows min values, deny 4♠ and show a ♥ stopper.

I'm a bit confused by your first statement. 1m (1om) can only mean 1♣ - (1♦) - ?

In that case, then yes, 1♥ or 1♠ show 4+. However, I think in standard most also play that 1♣ - (Dbl) - 1M shows 4+ and 1♦ - (Dbl) - 1M shows 4+. I say "in standard", because a lot of people are now playing transfers here starting with ReDbl.

As per the 1m - (1any) auctions, I can tell you that it's hard to have universal rules. We can start simply by comparing the following two auctions:

1. 1♣ - (1♥) - ?
2. 1♣ - (1♠) - ?

In auction 1., there are several popular treatments:

a. Dbl shows 4♠ exactly, 1♠ shows 5+♠
b. Dbl shows 4+♠, 1♠ shows something else (e.g. balanced)
c. Dbl denies 4 (or more) ♠, 1♠ shows 4+♠

However, in Auction 2, the negative double is just so important, so most play:

a. Dbl shows 4+♥ or
b. Dbl shows ♥+♦ (and 95% of the time it will be 4+♥)

So the treatments are often different.

Finally, I'm also not quite sure what you mean by 1m - (1any) - 1NT showing minimum values, denying 4♠ and showing a ♥ stopper. I presume you mean 1m - (1♥) - 1NT. In which case your treatment is standard. However, over 1♣ - (1♦) - 1NT and 1m - (1♠) - 1NT, having 1NT show a ♥ stopper and deny 4♠ seems strange.

[jillybean]

Right gnome my 1st auction should be

1♣ (1♦) 1M and the last 1m (1any) 1nt should be 1m (1anyM) 1nt , strange as it may be

[awm]

Certainly there are many different treatments available.

I think in a standard opening structure though, the hand where you are really stuck for a bid over 1m-(1♥) is quite rare. The issue is that you must have a four card suit somewhere. If you have four cards in opener's minor you can raise (2m or 2♥ depending on strength) and if you have four cards in the other minor and a good hand you can bid two of your minor (forcing one round). At times you can even raise opener's minor on three cards (yeah it's a little risky, but usually opener won't have three especially if you and RHO both have heart length).

The treatment where 1♠ is 4+ and double is "takeout" (actually I rather prefer reversing these two calls) is more necessary in a precision system where opener's 1♦ is often two or three cards and raising this bid is less desirable, or in a system where you open 1♣ on all balanced hands for similar reasons.