[TWO4BRIDGE]

Obviously, Han isn't interested in my posts... and most likely not the only person .

[han]

You are discriminating against your other posts. There are certainly situations where showing how the auctions in other systems would be interesting, but here I don't see the point.

I also have never seen a system where bidding 2D and then 3D shows 5+ diamonds. Now, there are many systems that I haven't seen, but it sounds very dubious.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

han, on 2013-March-28, 10:35, said:

I also have never seen a system where bidding 2D and then 3D shows 5+ diamonds. Now, there are many systems that I haven't seen, but it sounds very dubious.

2D can be 4+

[lmilne]

I (along with many other top 2/1 pairs) play 2♦ shows 5+ initially and that 3343/2344 with 4♦ responds 2♣. I think that's fairly standard, at least from my experience in my part of the world and a few years of international experience.

[gnasher]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-March-28, 18:35, said:

2D can be 4+

It's normal to play that:
- With a four-card suit you bid the suit and see if partner supports it immediately
- With five you bid the suit, then describe some other feature of your hand, and see if partner gives delayed support
- With six you bid it twice.

That principle doesn't just apply in this auction - it has wide applicability in constructive auctions. For example:
1♦-1♥;2♦ shows six; with only five you would bid a second suit or notrumps
1♥-1♠;2♣-2♠ shows six; with only five you would give preference, bid notrumps, or bid FSF.

There are some constructive sequences where you have to rebid a 5-card suit, but when responder voluntarily rebids his suit at the first opportunity it should show six.

[fromageGB]

gnasher, on 2013-March-29, 03:25, said:

It's normal to play that:
- With a four-card suit you bid the suit and see if partner supports it immediately
- With five you bid the suit, then describe some other feature of your hand, and see if partner gives delayed support

I almost completely agree, but when you bid a four card suit and partner does NOT support, then in some situations you are obliged to bid again. The obvious thing to do is describe some other feature of your hand, so these definitions are a bit shaky. Maybe replace the first with "with a four card suit you bid then suit, and if bidding again when partner does not support, show your balanced shape or partial support".

[TWO4BRIDGE]

gnasher, on 2013-March-29, 03:25, said:

It's normal to play that:
- With a four-card suit you bid the suit and see if partner supports it immediately
- With five you bid the suit, then describe some other feature of your hand, and see if partner gives delayed support
- With six you bid it twice.

And if you have five and partner does not support ( showing 4+ ) does this mean you can't rebid your suit ? ( perhaps missing a 5-3 fit ) .

[fromageGB]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-March-30, 07:12, said:

And if you have five and partner does not support ( showing 4+ ) does this mean you can't rebid your suit ? ( perhaps missing a 5-3 fit ) .

Following these sensible beginner guidelines, yes. If you are strong enough to force partner to bid again, bid a new suit, for example. It you are not strong enough, no. Bid his first suit, etc, or pass.

The is the problem addressed by such things as Kaplan Inversion and checkback. But come on, this is "expert-class" forum so we should not be discussing these obvious things.

[JLOGIC]

2S seems much better for describing your hand in all possible followups:

1H 2D 2H 2N 3D is much worse than 1H 2D 2S 2N 3D, 1H 2D 2H 3C 3D is worse than 1H 2D 2S 3C 3D, 1H 2D 2H 3D whatever is worse than 1H 2D 2S 3D whatever. Maybe if partner raises hearts then 2H is better (assuming the raise still shows 3) since our 6th heart is more important than our spade suit but that is unlikely, and if rebidding hearts might induce a raise on a doubleton where otherwise we would have gotten our dream sequence of 1H 2D 2S 2N 3D then that is very bad.

Our goal should be to describe 12 of our cards by 3D which even allows room for partner to bid 3H on a doubleton.

[Fluffy]

My dad always said 9 cards is better description than 6. This is normally on a contexts where 2m is also cheaper than 2M, but with just 1 step difference it remains true here.

[aguahombre]

deleted foolishness

[Zelandakh]

Just for han, here's a relay auction in a homegrown system.

1♥ = 10-17, 5+ hearts, unbal
... - 1♠ = INV+ relay
2♣ = 4+ spades
... - 2♦ = GF relay
2♥ = 4 spades, min, not 45(40)
... - 2♠ = relay
3♥ = 4630
... - 3♠ = relay
4♣ = 3 controls
... - 4♦ = relay
4NT = controls in both majors, not diamonds
... - 5♣ = relay
5♠ = 2 of top 3 in majors, 0 of top 3 in diamonds
... - 6♦

For the OP system, a start of 1♥ - 2♦; 2♠ - 3♦ seems fairly obvious. Opener now has 2 ways of agreeing diamonds, 4♣ and 4♦. What is the difference? Here are 3 schemes:-
1) Differentiate by strength: Here, 4♣ shows extras and 4♦ is weaker. This works somewhat like Serious 3NT. It is the scheme I personally like least.
2) Differentiate by club control: In this method, 4♣ generally shows a club control while 4♦ denies one. Here, any raise shows a club shortage though so 4♣ should show a void and 4♦ merely a singleton. This is probably the optimal scheme for this hand.
3) Mixed: My favourite idea in this situation is for 4♣ to start a cue auction (with 4♦ being the club cue and a subsequent 4NT RKCB or 5♣ Last Train) and 4♦ being my standard conditional KCB (4♥ declines a slam try, 4♠-5♦ accepts and shows key cards). This method should work here too, since finding North without a club control (and perhaps also with a spade control depending on the cue scheme used) is music to South's ears.

Assuming you play 2 with positive cues, a possible auction would be
1♥ - 2♦;
2♠ - 3♦;
4♣ - 4♠;
4NT - 5♠;
6♦