[kenrexford]

tolvyrj, on 2011-November-14, 14:01, said:

3♣, ugly 3- suiter and if u have a gadget for that, congratulations . Prds 2♦ response can be waiting without any clear cut positive bid, so lets find out if that is the case.
We had a pair here in Finland who had a nice system for these kind of situation; they have two game forcing openings 2♣ and 2♦; not sure if my memory serves me correctly but first opening denied and second one promised 4 card or longer spade suit.

Interesting idea.

[MrAce]

gnasher, on 2011-November-14, 12:58, said:

I'd bid 3♣ on the OP hand. I don't want to play 4♠ opposite xxx 10xxx xx xxxx, or 3NT opposite xxx xxx Kxxxx xx.

OP said 2♦ is any hand without a clear positive response, i assume this includes total trash hands. How on earth with std methods will you achieve not to play 3 NT with your 2nd example ?

2♣--2♦
3♣-- Now 3♦ will be 2nd negative with std methods and u will bid 3♠ and he will bid 3 NT.

You may reply that the "standart" i am talking about is not your standart, and knowing you i will take your word on it without a doubt but thats why i will start a new topic suggesting that we should create a comitee and prepare a BBO Forum standart, so we can debate better without slippery ground. Then we can debate the logic with same tools available, instead of debating "my method-your standart-our agreement - their agreement etc etc "