[32519]

I wanted to post this in the Novice Forum to avoid embarrassing myself, but then decided to go ahead and embarrass myself anyway. Mike 777’s reply here made me realise just how little I understand the differences between similar yet different conventions.

Can someone kindly explain the differences between these conventions at Novice level for me please?
1. Checkback Stayman
2. New Minor Forcing
3. Two-Way New Minor Forcing
4. XYZ
5. Fourth Suit Forcing
6. Roudi (added, I found this in a different thread and then looked it up here)
7. Crowhurst (added, I found this in a different thread and then looked it up here)
8. The Weak 6-4 Method (added, I found this here)

To me there appears to be a certain amount of overlap between these conventions. I have never played Two-Way New Minor Forcing, nor XYZ before so I have absolutely no idea as to their effectiveness.

That said, I am repeating my request a second time:
1. Can someone explain the differences between these conventions to me at Novice level (maybe there are more similar conventions that can be added to this list)?
2. Can you kindly include some example auctions accompanied by a typical hand for each partner for each convention?
3. Which one is better to use and why?

WHAT SCARES ME NOW IS THE NUMBER OF VARIATIONS AVAILABLE IN THIS WONDERFUL GAME OF OURS FOR SIMILAR BIDDING SEQUENCES!!

Thank you.

This post has been edited.

[Antrax]

I don't think FSF belongs here, as it applies in auctions where opener showed two suits, and 1-3 apply in auction where opener rebids NT after a suit opening.

[mike777]

32519, on 2012-March-18, 03:02, said:

I wanted to post this in the Novice Forum to avoid embarrassing myself, but then decided to go ahead and embarrass myself anyway. Mike 777’s reply here made me realise just how little I understand the differences between similar yet different conventions.

Can someone kindly explain the differences between these conventions at Novice level for me please?
1. Checkback Stayman
2. New Minor Forcing
3. Two-Way New Minor Forcing
4. XYZ
5. Fourth Suit Forcing

To me there appears to be a certain amount of overlap between these 5 conventions. I have never played Two-Way New Minor Forcing, nor XYZ before so I have absolutely no idea as to their effectiveness.

That said, I am repeating my request a second time:
1. Can someone explain the differences between these 5 conventions to me at Novice level (maybe there is a 6th or 7th similar convention that can be added to this list)?
2. Can you kindly include some example auctions accompanied by a typical hand for each partner for each convention?
3. Which one is better to use and why?

Thank you.

lets back up
4sf is different from all of the above....it is artificial and game force.
---------
1x1y1z is only on after any and all three bids on the one level it is a form of checkback stayman.

---

funny enough you need to agree if you play xyz........in general assume you play 4sf with no other discussion
Yes there is overlap.

-------------------


I will let others tell the difference on points one two and three.

[mike777]

Antrax, on 2012-March-18, 03:04, said:

I don't think FSF belongs here, as it applies in auctions where opener showed two suits, and 1-3 apply in auction where opener rebids NT after a suit opening.

4sf does belong here because you need to know if xyz is on.


1d=1h
1s=2c?


is 2c 4sf or xyz or other?

for me it is xyz.....


but 2c could be:
4sf
nmf
xyz
checkback
two way checkback\
other
natural

[Cyberyeti]

One you occasionally see in the UK is Crowhurst, there are various flavours of this, some people bid 2N with any maximum, or any maximum without 3 cards in partner's suit.

This is used where a partnership decides to use a wide range 1N rebid. If you do this, unlike in normal Acol, you open the minor with 4M4m32, you can modify it slightly if you play 5 card majors and the minor can be short. Say you play a 16-18 1N opener and a 12-15 1N rebid.

1♦-1♠-1N-2♣!-?

2♦ 12-13 not 4♥ not 3♠
2♥ 12-13 4♥ not denying 3♠
2♠ 12-13 3♠ not 4♥
2N 14-15 3343
3♣ 14-15 (23)44
3♦ 14-15 5♦ not denying 3♠
3♥ 14-15 4♥ not denying 3♠

[Flameous]

Ok, I'll try to give a short introduction. First, aim of all of these is to check back if opener holds a three card support for responder's major. With first three we are only discussing sequences like 1m - 1M - 1NT.

Checkback stayman is the simplest, you bid 2♣ to ask for 3 card support, and if it was 1m - 1♠, also for 4 hearts. Without either you bid 2♦. I'm not sure what all kinds of hands you put through this, but I'd assume all GF hands that don't bid 3NT bid 2♣, meaning others are at most invitational.

New minor forcing is pretty much the same as Checkback stayman, with the difference that it's always the new minor which is the inquiry. I think there is some standard of what hands are put through nmf but I'm not quite sure. Either GF or inv+ anyways.

I don't know who had the nerve for again stealing and renaming one convention. This is apparently the one Kit Woolsey wrote about with the name two-way checkback stayman. After that it has also been known with the name XY-NT. The primary point of this method is that 2♣ is a forcing puppet to 2♦ and 2♦ is GF relay. After 2♣ you can either pass 2♦ (especially important playing walsh) or bid anything as invitational. Many also include 2NT as a transfer to clubs to fit some more hand types. My XY-NT structure is over 3 pages long so there is plenty of stuff to do if you can remember it all.

XYZ is the same, but you also include sequences 1♦ - 1♥ - 1♠ and 1♣ - 1♥ - 1♠, ie. no NT rebid. I'm not a big fan of it if suit rebid shows unbalanced hand since you can't play in opener's minor then.

4th suit forcing simply means that 4th suit is artificial, usually GF but at least inv+. Comparing to those two xyz auctions, your 4th suit forcing is essentially same as NMF, but 4th suit auctions are many and all with their own twists. I don't think there is a general consensus if opener bidding 3 different suits counts as 4th suit.

For which is best, well I'd say you can't live without 4th suit forcing but it's possible to live without any kind of checkback after 1NT, not that it's easy. Assuming you play walsh and have regular partner and time to work the continuations, XY-NT/z is the way to go. The amount of hands you can show is huge, probably so much that they all won't come up during your whole bridge playing career.
NMF is simple standardish convention (with many tweaks of course) you can assume with most, it has the good side of still being able to play in opener's minor.

[BunnyGo]

32519, on 2012-March-18, 03:02, said:

I wanted to post this in the Novice Forum to avoid embarrassing myself, but then decided to go ahead and embarrass myself anyway. Mike 777’s reply here made me realise just how little I understand the differences between similar yet different conventions.

Can someone kindly explain the differences between these conventions at Novice level for me please?
1. Checkback Stayman
2. New Minor Forcing
3. Two-Way New Minor Forcing
4. XYZ
5. Fourth Suit Forcing

To me there appears to be a certain amount of overlap between these 5 conventions. I have never played Two-Way New Minor Forcing, nor XYZ before so I have absolutely no idea as to their effectiveness.

That said, I am repeating my request a second time:
1. Can someone explain the differences between these 5 conventions to me at Novice level (maybe there is a 6th or 7th similar convention that can be added to this list)?
2. Can you kindly include some example auctions accompanied by a typical hand for each partner for each convention?
3. Which one is better to use and why?

Thank you.

Ok, I'll give it my best shot:

1) Checkback stayman (there are two different conventions of the same name on wikipedia, I'll address the one that fits with these better)

This is the auction:

1m-1M
1N-2C

2C is checkback stayman searching for a major fit. Opener then bids 2D with no 3 card support for the bid major, nor 4 card for the unbid and a minimum. He bids 2M with 3 card support and 2Other Major with 4 cards. He bids 2N with no support for the majors and a maximum.

2) New minor forcing

This is similar, but it matters what the opening minor is:

1D-1M
1N-2C

or

1C-1M
1N-2D

This is "new minor" forcing

opener bids 2M or 2Other major the same as in Checkback stayman, but bidding 2D (in the first example) or 3C (in the second) just shows a natural suit. 2NT doesn't promise extra strength, just denies any extra "shape" (no 3 card support, no 4 card other major, no extra minor suit length worth showing).

Some people play new minor forcing is a game force, some just a 1 round force. I play game force, but it's not necessarily "better".

3)Two-Way NMF and XYZ

I am under the impression that these are ostensibly the same thing (some other poster should correct me if I'm wrong).

1x-1y
1z-??? (any x, y and z)

2C now is a relay to 2D. The 2D bid can then be passed to drop the auction there, or any further bid by responder is natural and invitational. Example:

1C-1H
1N-2C*
2D**-2H
P

2C forced 2D, then 2H showed a 5 or 6 card heart suit and an invitation to game. The advantage is now you're only at the 2 level and can stop there instead of having to jump to the 3 level to invite.

2D is an artificial game force. The responses are as in NMF:

1D-1S
1N-2D*
2H**-3N

2D said nothing about diamonds, just a game force. 2H showed 4 hearts and denied 3 spades (primary response is to show 3 card support before showing a 4 card other major) and 3N said, ok then, let's play game here.

2M is to play:

1D-1S
1N-2S*
P

2S is a drop bid, non-invitational.

2N would be a relay to 3C, drop or keep bidding naturally:

1C-1S
1N-2N*
3C**-P

To make an invite in NT, go through 2C:

1C-1S
1N-2C*
2D**-2N***
P

ok. Hope that wasn't too much information.

5) 4th suit forcing: Again, some people play this as a game force, some people play it as a 1 round force. The responses are natural. Example:

1C-1H
1S-2D*

2D is not showing diamonds, it is showing strength (depending on agreement, 1 round force or game force) and asks opener to say more about his hand. He'll bid 2H now with 3 hearts, 2N with a diamond stopper and 1-2 hearts, 3C with a real club suit, 2S with another spade, etc.


Hope this helped,

Ben

[sfi]

Imagine you have the auction 1C - 1H; 1NT. Without conventions, you can sign off by bidding 2C or 2H. You can force to game by bidding 3 of anything. But the only invitational bid is typically 2NT.

So, you decide you need a convention.

Your first thought is "how about I use the minor partner didn't open as an artificial bid". This bid can mean "partner, I have an invitational hand somewhere." Partner can now show their shape, with minimum hands being bid at the two level and maximum hands at the three level. That way responder (that's you in this vignette) can find out if opener has 3 card support so we can play in our 5-3 major fit.

That's New Minor Forcing (NMF). You give up a natural bid of 2 of the unbid minor to suggest an invitational hand. I say 'suggest' because you gain other sequences that I will mention in a bit, and these can be used to add definition to stronger auctions.

Now, one problem with NMF is that you have a lot more room when partner opens 1D than when they open 1C. "Not Fair!" you cry, one day in frustration when you find yourself still guessing at the three level. So you think "nobody ever gets to play the hand anyway when the bidding goes 1C-1H; 1NT-2C, so why don't we always use 2C as the artificial bid?"

Now you have Checkback. The advantage is that you always have a 2D response available, which can be helpful in a number of ways. For example, you could agree that 2D denies 3 card support, four of the other major, and shows a minimum hand. You could even agree that partner will always bid 2D and now you can describe your hand, rather than opener describing theirs (this way you even get to play in 2D). That last one probably has a different name that someone else will let us know about, but you get the idea - you give up playing in 2C and you gain lots of useful ways to show or ask about hands.

"Well, this Checkback stuff works well", you think one day. I wonder if it can be expanded to other situations? Of course. For example, you can play 2C as an artificial enquiry after any 1X-1Y; 1Z auction, which leads to the name 'XYZ'.

You might decide that you don't want to play in 2D either (or you are forcing the NT bidder to bid 2D, so you get to it that way). If so, you can make 2D artificial - maybe 2C shows invitational hands and 2D shows hands that are forcing to game. That's Two-Way New Minor Forcing, one of the more joyless names for conventions by the way.


All of these conventions are most frequently used when responder has a 5 card major and is looking for a 5-3 fit. However, you can use the extra space to improve your stronger auctions as well. A simple example might be:

1C - 1H; 1NT - 3H

We can now use this as a forcing bid because an invitational hand would bid 2C (maybe it's forcing for you anyway, but then you could not invite on your 10 count with 6 hearts). But you also have the auction:

1C - 1H; 1NT - 2C; 2D - 3H

This should be forcing since 2H would be invitational. But why would you choose this way to show a forcing heart hand? Maybe this is how you bid with 4 spades, or you can show 5 vs. 6 hearts, or one could even show a fit for opener's minor.

The idea is similar for each one, but the specifics differ between them. They also differ between different people playing something called the same thing, so you can find a number of examples on the net. Playing something along these lines is far more important than which one you play.

[mike777]

geez confusing


I think the main point is we have made any
1x1y1z then 2c or 2d confusing as heck.....


btw I understand if even any 1x...1y...1z sounds confusing as all heck.


If you read the forums every day it is clear...but


If not it sounds confusing as all heck.

--


I remember when I first heard about right triangles and my first question was whose right?

dont get my started on what the heck when using a computer what a write click means.....

[Vampyr]

All of the above posts are good efforts, but I would stick with sfi's if I were you.

[Quantumcat]

Here's a summary:

All the conventions are designed to find out, after an action starts 1-1-1 (e.g. 1C 1H 1NT) whether opener has four cards in the other major (if one was bid), or 3-card support for responder's suit.

The simplest is checkback stayman. Checkback stayman is for auctions that begins 1-minor, 1-major, 1NT. A 2♣ bid by responder is at least invitational and asks opener to say whether he has 4 cards in the other major, or 3 cards in responder's major. If he has more than one option, he should bid the lower (like responding to 1NT 2♣ stayman - when you have 4 hearts and 4 spades you bid 2♥). A 2♦ bid is by partnership agreement. This also means that the auction 1♣ 1♠ 1NT 2♥ (or 1♣ 1♥ 1NT 2♦) is weak - if responder had invitational values he would have used checkback. Opener is free to pass when he has support for the second suit.

Slightly more advanced is new-minor forcing. This is exactly the same as checkback stayman, only instead of 2♣, it is whichever minor opener didn't bid. Responder can then sign off in opener's minor: the auction 1♣ 1♥ 1NT 2♣ is weak and to play, whereas 1♣ 1♥ 1NT 2♦ is now the conventional asking bid. Same as above, 1♦ 1♠ 1NT 2♥ is weak.

I'm not sure what two-way new minor forcing is, sorry!

More advanced still is the convention 1X-1Y-1Z. Similar to checkback and new-minor forcing except it applies to any 1-1-1 auction, not just ones that end in 1NT. There are many versions, but the most common (where I play) is that 2♣ shows any invitational hand or sign-off in diamonds, and asks opener to bid 2♦. Then responder's rebid is natural and invitational. For example, 1♣ 1♥ 1♠ 2♣ 2♦ 2♥ shows an invitational hand with at least five hearts. Any gameforce hand bids 2♦ instead of 2♣, then opener bids something naturally, then responder's rebid is natural and gameforcing. The benefit here is that gameforcing hands don;t need to do any jumping, since they are not afraid of being passed. Also (as in the previous example), invitational hands can come to rest at a lower level, since opener is free to pass any natural bid if not accepting the invite.

The best of all is that all bids (starting at 2♦) are transfers, showing either a weak sign-off or a gameforce. All invitational hands start with a 2♣ puppet to 2♦ as above. This gives you loads more room than you would have under any other method. Even better still is to open 1♣ whenever you were planning to open a minor and rebid 1NT, increasing the frequency of these auctions. Opening 1♦ and rebiding 1NT can show whatever you would normally have jumped to 2NT on (18-19, usually). This convention, along with transfers to 1♣, is now the latest craze in Australia and you won't find any expert partnerships not playing some sort of version of it. Don't know about the situation overseas.

[Cthulhu D]

Quantumcat, on 2012-March-18, 22:57, said:

The best of all is that all bids (starting at 2♦) are transfers, showing either a weak sign-off or a gameforce. All invitational hands start with a 2♣ puppet to 2♦ as above. This gives you loads more room than you would have under any other method. Even better still is to open 1♣ whenever you were planning to open a minor and rebid 1NT, increasing the frequency of these auctions. Opening 1♦ and rebiding 1NT can show whatever you would normally have jumped to 2NT on (18-19, usually). This convention, along with transfers to 1♣, is now the latest craze in Australia and you won't find any expert partnerships not playing some sort of version of it. Don't know about the situation overseas.

You got a decent writeup of transfers here? I'm already playing transfer walsh - so I'm just asking about transfers after 1X-1Y-1Z. Though really 2X weak or game force while 2C is weak or invitational is pretty easy.

The Hog has posted a writeup here before but keen to see what's floating around.

[32519]

Quantumcat, on 2012-March-18, 22:57, said:

The best of all is that all bids (starting at 2♦) are transfers, showing either a weak sign-off or a gameforce. All invitational hands start with a 2♣ puppet to 2♦ as above. This gives you loads more room than you would have under any other method. Even better still is to open 1♣ whenever you were planning to open a minor and rebid 1NT, increasing the frequency of these auctions. Opening 1♦ and rebiding 1NT can show whatever you would normally have jumped to 2NT on (18-19, usually). This convention, along with transfers to 1♣, is now the latest craze in Australia and you won't find any expert partnerships not playing some sort of version of it. Don't know about the situation overseas.

Cthulhu D, on 2012-March-18, 23:04, said:

You got a decent writeup of transfers here? I'm already playing transfer walsh - so I'm just asking about transfers after 1X-1Y-1Z. Though really 2X weak or game force while 2C is weak or invitational is pretty easy. The Hog has posted a writeup here before but keen to see what's floating around.

I think Cthulhu and I have similar (or the same?) question:
How do I play Transfer Walsh and XYZ in the same bidding system? Both seem to be quite popular now.

[Cthulhu D]

32519, on 2012-March-18, 23:15, said:

I think Cthulhu and I have similar (or the same?) question:
How do I play Transfer Walsh and XYZ in the same bidding system? Both seem to be quite popular now.

He's not talking about XYZ, he's talking about something like Leong transfers - which are an X-Y-1NT altenative.

XYZ is really easy to play with transfer walsh, you just.. play it. Any auction where opener shows a weak NT or a strong NT is an ideal candidate. So 1C!-1H!-1S (if 1S shows 2 or 3 card support) or 1C!-1H!-1NT both work fine.

It's just not very useful in two of the transfer Walsh auctions, 1C!-1D!-1H and 1C!-1D!-1S. The first once you're better off playing 1S as a relay and in the second XYZ is not great here - it's supposed to be for the unbalanced hand to ask the balanced hand stuff, but after 1C!-1D!-1S opener is unbalanced (4=1=3=5 being the most likely handshape).

[Quantumcat]

Cthulhu D, on 2012-March-18, 23:04, said:

You got a decent writeup of transfers here? I'm already playing transfer walsh - so I'm just asking about transfers after 1X-1Y-1Z. Though really 2X weak or game force while 2C is weak or invitational is pretty easy.

The Hog has posted a writeup here before but keen to see what's floating around.

It is incredibly simple - two or three rules cover every possible bid: (examples at the bottom)

1. Any bid at the 1-level is natural.

2. 2♣ asks partner to bid 2♦, intending to pass or make a natural rebid showing an invite. Opener has the choice of not accepting the puppet under agreed circumstances.

3. Any transfer shows a sign-off or is gameforcing. Opener accepts the transfer unless he is too strong (he is still interested in game even if responder has a sign-off).

Examples:

1. 1♣ 1♦ 1♥ 1♠
or 1♦ 1♥ 1♠ 1NT

2. Playing transfer responses to 1♣ you might agree that accepting a transfer shows 3-card support and jump-accepting a transfer shows 4 card support and 14-16 HCP. So after having accepted the transfer at the 1-level, you may bid 2 of responder's major after the 2♣ puppet, instead of 2♦, to show a minimum with 4-card support. Also you might bid something else if you are still interested in game even if responder has a sign-off in diamonds.

3. Doesn't really need an example.

Bids above the suit transfers are for partnership discussion. You might play them as transfer-splinters (opener accepting shows the ace, to simplify keycard for responder if he has a void), or something else. 3♠ however should always be a transfer to 3NT.

The main benefit is keeping auctions low - invites can be passed at the two level, and gameforce hands can take all the time they need to bid out their shape.

Note that if you want to invite to a slam, you can play in game instead of 4NT/5-major if the invite is not accepted: 1♣ 1♥ 1NT 2♣ 2♦ 3NT pass!

I feel like my partner came up with it, since we were playing it before it became so popular, but in fact it was first published a very long time ago (I can look it up if you want).

Another convention we (think we) came up with (that you might like, if you like 1X-1Y-1Z) is transfers over a pre-emptive 2-major opening. 2NT to one-below-3-of-the-preempt-suit are transfers [excluding partner's suit, which stays as natural pre-emptive], which you can use to show more than one suit, to play (useful if you are void in partner's suit, but don't want to make a forcing bid), to show invitations to game or slam, or to set partner's preempt suit as trumps and start cue-bidding auctions as quickly as possible.

e.g. 2♠ 2NT 3♣ pass - you have lots of clubs, weak hand, and void in spades
2♥ 2♠ pass - weak to play, void in hearts
2♠ 3♣ 3♦ 3♥ - gameforce, choose between 5♦ and 4♥ as contracts (longer diamonds).
2♠ 3♦ 3♥ 4♦ - gameforce, choose between 5♦ and 4♥ as contracts (longer hearts, or equal).
2♠ 3♥ 3NT 4♣ 4♥ 6♠ pass - 3♥ was a spade invite, 3NT accepted (leaving room for partner to cue), 4♣ cue, 4♥ cue, which was just what responder wanted to hear.
2♥ 3♣ 3♦ 3♥ pass - invite with a diamond suit that will provide tricks if it has some help
2♠ 3♥ 3♠ 3NT pass - Responder says to opener: I am counting on you to have a good suit for 3NT; if you don't we are better off trying 4♠.
2♠ 3NT - Responder says to opener: I don't care what you have, I basically have 8-9 tricks in my own hand (or the classic psyche, weak hand with support, planning to run to 4♠ if doubled).

[Zelandakh]

32519, on 2012-March-18, 03:02, said:

Can someone kindly explain the differences between these conventions at Novice level for me please?
1. Checkback Stayman

This is where the auction begins: 1m - 1M; 1NT. Checkback Stayman is using a 2♣ rebid artificially to ask if Opener has 3 card support for our major or 4 cards in the other major. Just like regular Stayman it can also be used to establish a force. A typical rule is that a bid is one step higher after 2♣ than bidding it directly, so 1♣ - 1♥; 1NT - 3♥ is invitational but 1♣ - 1♥; 1NT - 2♣; 2♠; 3♥ is game-forcing. You can also extend this to the auction 1♥ - 1♠; 1NT if desired.
Example:
1♣ - 1♠
1NT - 2♣ = Checkback
Now:
2♦ = <4 hearts, <3 spades
2♥ = 4 hearts
2♠ = 3 spades, <4 hearts
(Some allow higher bids with specific hands)

32519, on 2012-March-18, 03:02, said:

2. New Minor Forcing

This applies in the same auctions as Checkback Stayman. Indeed it is identical unless the opening was 1♣. If the opening was 1♣ then the difference is that our artificial call is now 2♦ instead of 2♣. This has the advantage of allowing us to support partner's clubs with a weak hand but the disadvantage that our constructive auctions are worse.
Example:
1♣ - 1♠
1NT - 2♦ = NMF
Now:
2♥ = 4 hearts
2♠ = 3 spades, <4 hearts
2NT = min, <4 hearts, <3 spades
others = max, <4 hearts, <3 spades, natural

32519, on 2012-March-18, 03:02, said:

3. Two-Way New Minor Forcing

I assume you mean 2-way Checkback here. This is essentially just double-barelled Stayman after a 1NT rebid. Again, applying in the same auctions as Checkback (1NT rebid) this is a method where a 2♣ rebid is a puppet to 2♦, either to play there or with any invitational hand, while a 2♦ rebid shows a game-forcing hand. In most cases this is a superior method to either of the previous two and has pretty much become expert standard.
Example:
1♣ - 1♠
1NT
Now:
... - 2♣ = puppet to 2♦, to play there or any invitational hand
... - 2♦ = artificial GF
... - 2M = weak and natural

32519, on 2012-March-18, 03:02, said:

4. XYZ

XYZ is effectively 2-Way Checkback for all auctions which begin with 3 one-level calls. This is essentially an alternative to 4th Suit Forcing in these auctions.
Example:
1♦ - 1♥
1♠
Now:
... - 1NT = natural
... - 2♣ = puppet to 2♦, to play there or any invitational hand
... - 2♦ = artificial game force
... - 2M = weak and natural

32519, on 2012-March-18, 03:02, said:

5. Fourth Suit Forcing

Applies in any auction that starts with 3 suit bids all in different suits. Now bidding the fourth suit is artificial asking for additional information about Opener's hand. Originally this was played as invitational or better but many pairs play it as a full game force now.
Example:
1♦ - 1♥
1♠
Now:
... - 1NT = natural
... - 2♣ = artificial force
... - 2♦/2M = weak and natural

32519, on 2012-March-18, 03:02, said:

6. Roudi (added, I found this in a different thread and then looked it up here)

I have never played this but it looks like a sub-standard version of Checkback from the write-up.

32519, on 2012-March-18, 03:02, said:

7. Crowhurst (added, I found this in a different thread and then looked it up here)

Crowhurst, lovingly referred to as "Crowbar" by many in the UK, is a method to allow a NT rebid with a wider range than usual. The story runs that Eric Crowhurst had an extreme aversion to opening 1NT with a small doubleton and devised this method so that he could avoid doing so. Modern players do not have such an aversion but have found a use for the convention in allowing them to extend their NT ranges. There are various forms of the convention around but typical is that 2♣ asks for range with 2♦ showing a minimum and other bids showing additional values.

32519, on 2012-March-18, 03:02, said:

8. The Weak 6-4 Method (added, I found this here)

No idea about this. It looks to be a way of using the bids that are freed up by using artificial follow-ups but there are other (more standard) ways of using these bids which are probably better.

32519, on 2012-March-18, 03:02, said:

That said, I am repeating my request a second time:
3. Which one is better to use and why?

Better is always a somewhat subjective term and to some extent depends on other parts of the system. I have said to you a few times already that you cannot look at each of these conventions in isolation but must always look at the effectiveness of your system as a whole. That said, assuming a typical 5 card major, strong NT system I would suggest that 2-way Checkback is the best of the methods after a 1NT opening. And if I were playing 2WC I would probably also play XYZ for consistency. I would certainly not recommend Crowhurst for a beginner - you really need to be solving a specific issue forn this to make sense imho.

32519, on 2012-March-18, 03:02, said:

WHAT SCARES ME NOW IS THE NUMBER OF VARIATIONS AVAILABLE IN THIS WONDERFUL GAME OF OURS FOR SIMILAR BIDDING SEQUENCES!!

My recommendation to a beginner would be to stop worrying about system for a while and learn bidding judgement with simple methods. I am a strong believer in using "methods" to aid bidding judgement but the quickest way to develop is to play few conventions and learn where natural is good and not so good. You generally only need a convention where you have noticed a particular problem. This will happen naturally as you improve.

And yes, I am the world's worst example here as I started designing system before I had even played with a real-life partner. On the other hand I think that puts me in a pretty good position to know that this approach was the wrong one!