[blackshoe]

Interestingly, Jerry Helms seems to agree with Atwoo. In his book Helms to Hello, in which he describes Hello as a defense to 1NT, he advocates dbl for the majors, 1NT for the minors (Mathé), suits at the one level natural, and bids above 1NT to be Hello - 2♣ transfers to ♦, 2♦ transfers to hearts, 2♥ is both majors (more playing strength that dbl), 2♠ is natural, 2NT transfer to ♣, 3♣ both minors. He does not, iirc, include the major-minor two suiters in 2♣, or the 3♦ bid to show both majors (forcing) in the defense to 1♣, though they are part of Hello over 1NT. I suppose this has more memory problems than just "play your 1NT defense at the two level", but my partnerships seem either to have few memory problems with new conventions, or to have enough problems that we are reluctant to add anything new at all.

[awm]

Most defenses to 1nt don't have a way to bid clubs at the two level. This makes sense because a 2c bid doesn't take any space (no preemption) and you probably want to use the cheapest calls to show something where you can compete more effectively (like majors) or something more frequent (like a multi-meaning bid) or something more lucrative (like majors or a power double).

None of the above applies over strong club, where its really nice to be able to bid clubs at the two level. I suspect Mathe is a much better defense to 1c than most 1nt defenses.

[awm]

Oops, duplicate post.

[Zelandakh]

awm, on 2012-April-12, 18:15, said:

Most defenses to 1nt don't have a way to bid clubs at the two level.

You can get around this problem by using 1NT as multi for the minors, that is clubs or diamonds. So, for example, "Multi-Land over 1♣" would become

X = clubs
1♦♥♠ = natural
1NT = clubs or diamonds
2♣ = majors
2♦ = hearts or spades
2♥ = hearts + minor
2♠ = spades + minor
2NT = minors

Perhaps not ideal but nonetheless quite reasonable. Whether this is less to remember than simply playing something like Mathe over 1♣ is doubtful though.