[aguahombre]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2012-April-06, 20:53, said:

So, for the sequence:
1♠ - 2♥
3♥ - 3♠! ( Responder shows a ♠-card when he has it and says nothing about "Seriousness" )

Would it be out of the question for that sequence to establish a 2-suit fit? This would still leave "serious" 3NT by opener; and responder (if she is the serious one) would simply cooperate with non-serious or continue bidding over a 4M dog signoff by opener.

I realize that might be too unsophisticated; but it seems to allow for something quite frequent (responder being 3-5 in the majors and wanting to show same).

[wyman]

We play 3S as dbl fit and 3N as saying "no, hearts." 4x is a Spade cue if 3n not bid. Not ideal but it's at least _an_ agreement.

[broze]

Phil, on 2012-April-04, 09:11, said:

Don, you do realize that Fred wrote these articles around 20 years ago, right?

Do you mean that you think the articles are out-dated? If so, which parts do you, or other experts think are outdated, and if not then what is your point?

[TWO4BRIDGE]

aguahombre, on 2012-April-06, 21:09, said:

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2012-April-06, 20:53, said:

So, for the sequence:
1♠ - 2♥
3♥ - 3♠! ( Responder shows a ♠-card when he has it and says nothing about "Seriousness" )

Would it be out of the question for that sequence to establish a 2-suit fit?

There is a difference when it comes to a combination of a major and minor .
Take the following:
1)
1D 1S
3S 4D

Spades are clearly trump, and 4D is a cue bid .

2)
1S 2D
3D 3S
In this case, a double-fit is announced, and Spades becomes the established suit.

3) Both Majors -- the exception ( as I learned it ):
1S 2H
3H 3S
Here, Hearts is the established suit and 3S is the cue bid .

Of course you can have a different agreement with your partner.