[Cyberyeti]

We keep 1N-2♣-2any-3♣ as natural to play and use 1N-2♣-2♦-3♥ (or bid of the other major if partner shows one) as our minor suit ask with a possibly slamgoing hand (replies 4m = 5 card suit, 3♠ = minimum no 5CS, 3N = maximum no 5CS and further asks over 3♠/3N).

We use 1N-2♣-2♦-3♠ as slam invite plus with exactly 5♦/3♣ as it's the one combination that we have trouble with in the system we use where you want to know if partner has 5 clubs or 3+ diamonds, and can't find out about both fast enough.

[FrancesHinden]

peachy, on Sep 2 2010, 05:18 PM, said:

Mohitz showed a system but the trouble is that with "ordinary strength" responder, opponents will be given a roadmap both as to exact shape. Defenders have an easy time defending.

You don't use this method as an 'ordinary strength' responder, it's only used when responder has slam interest.

I play 3C as artificial in both regular partnerships, but just to keep MickyB happy in both cases it is 'showing' something rather than asking. And I do have other ways to show a game forcing hand with clubs....

[Zelandakh]

MickyB, on Sep 4 2010, 04:50 AM, said:

Gnasher - if you don't have Stayman available over 1NT, do youhave a sensible way to bid unbalanced hands with both majors and about a 7-count (assuming a 15-17 NT)? Perhaps something along the lines of 2C = spades, 2D = hearts, 2H = both majors constructive NF?

I don't play it (heaven forbid) but this structure, designed for a weak NT, seems to do what you are asking without using Stayman
http://www.bridgemat...om/weakmini.htm

[NickToll]

In Italy the standard meaning of the sequence 2♣-then-3♣ by the responder has been "Re-Stayman" for a long time. It was a minor-suit ask: usual replies by the opener were 3♦ with four or five diamonds, 3NT with four or five clubs, 3M with that three-card major and both four-card minors. After a 2M reply to Stayman, over 3♣ opener had to show a second 4card suit with 3♦, 3OM or 3NT (for clubs), or repeat his original major with 4333 (or possibly 5332). Very simple and very inefficient: today almost nobody plays it anymore.

The standard system at that time didn't even include transfers: the only forcing response was 2♣, whereas 2♦♥♠ were natural signoffs and 3♣♦♥♠ were invitational with HHxxxx and out. 2♣-then-3♣ was more or less the only way to handle minor two-suiters and strong balanced hands.