[straube]

So we play a nebulous diamond. Our 2N is GI and presumably has to handle 5m332s and 4m4m32s and 4m333s. Is this a good idea when we haven't a clue what minor opener has?

Currently we play

2C-GI+
.....2D-5D/4M, relayable
.....2H-bal
.....2S-fit
.....2N-1444, min
.....3C-weak raise, 4 balanced
.....etc-max, splinters
2D-GI+
.....similar
2H-5S/4+H weak
2S-5m/4+m weak
2N-GI
3m-weak

but we changed our rebids over 1D-1S, 1N some months ago to include 1444, 1435, and 1453 and we don't get full value out of our reverse Flannery hand.

So would the following be better?

2C-GI+
.....2D-5D/4M or balanced with 4-5 diamonds (so we can find diamonds now)
..........2H-GF relay (won't relay all balanced shapes)
.....etc
2D-GI+
.....similar
2H-GI, 6H
2S-GI, 6S
2N-weak minors
3m-weak

I like being able to show the weak minors and preempt in any suit. I'm not sure that 2N is a very attractive place for this because it's easy to defend against, it's nice to use this for hands that may possibly declare NT, and unlike the 2S bid for weak minors it leaves no asking bid for opener to find the longer minor. Adam uses 2N as a shortness ask which doubles as a WJS in a minor which I like but we're relaying with 1H over 1D with balanced hands so I'm not sure if we'd get full value of this. Maybe we would.

Which structure is better? Any suggestions?

[awm]

We have switched to play 2nt as weak both minors. There are a number of reasons for this change: 1. Trying to avoid pre-alerts/mid-chart conventions on our card. 2. The "perfecto" we were previously using 1♦-3m for is too infrequent to be worthwhile. 3. Problems with giving 4th hand options over the WJS, and in particular making it hard for ourselves to compete properly after 4th hand overcalls. 4. Having a way to preempt with both minors seems useful.

I personally think the negatives of 2nt for minors are overstated. Even if you play 3♣ for both minors, opponents have a lot of options over this call (double, 3♦ cue) and adding the additional cuebid (which most opponents don't really make good use of in any case) is not that costly. In comparison the cost of allowing opponents free calls when we have a club preempt (or simply not having a bid for club preempt) is much more expensive.

Our structure is closer to your second structure, except we prefer to play 1♦-2M as a "less than invitational" blocking bid. A few arguments for this include effective preemption of opponents when we have weaker hands and frequency (we can play a very wide range safely because opener is limited). Note that many of the advantages of invitational jumps vs. constructive jumps involve better slam bidding when opener has a very strong hand, which won't happen here. We do therefore define sequences like 1♦-1M-2♣-2M as invitational to gain the "stopping at the two level" advantage where possible. Note that this also helps us on some complex invitational sequences (i.e. if 1♦-2♠ is INV, it's not clear whether 3♣ should be a weak 5/5 or a strong 5/5).

[straube]

Thanks. How then do you invite with 5 and 6-cd suits after 1D-1M, 1N. This may seem a stupid question to folks not familiar, but it's not because you (and I) rebid 1N with 1435 and 1444 etc and I think you only rebid spades with 6.

So does 1D-1S, 1N-2C, 2D-2S show 5 and invites while

1D-1S, 1N-2S shows 6 and invites?

Same thing then for hearts? For me I'll always have 2 hearts for a 1N rebid so responder may rebid a 5-cd suit.