[Lovera]

Zelandakh, on 2016-July-04, 03:06, said:

It looks like a good example of what I wrote before, that "Regular Stayman" varies according to where you are. It is also certainly true that 2NT was used for a maximum without a major and that 2♠, rather than 2♥, was bid with both majors in the prototypical versions, not only from Stayman/Rapee but also from Marx. The other major difference that I know of between then and now is that "Forcing Stayman" was the original standard. That means, for example, that 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 2M would be forcing rather than invitational.

So to go back to Lovera's question, "what do you think about the not using of regular or classic Stayman", I would say that that would be an excellent idea if classic means the 1945/1946 publications! As a general rule, skipping 70 years of bidding theory will tend to allow for the odd improvement here and there.

What you said about improving it is innegable also by me but the original version (directly by author) is basic for any ultherior version "fashionable" too. In this meaning (classic is for regular) you must read what i told. Not that anyone can use but, considering basic as "more common" and propedeutic to other version(s) a referring it'd been welcome instead jump to last(=up-to-date) version of it (or, the same, the converse).

[Lovera]

This my "variation" at the system from book can be considered also a kind of "guideline" apts to simplify bidding in (and surely anyones will do it for own use) avoiding particolarities and complexity having although the almost (with any necessary changing because a major suit there is not) same bid developing (that i don't show- see book for correlation). The hands can be divided into two groups : 1) invitational (ending in game if partner can help you) or less 2) for game (when is bidded a new suit to show force) and more. Because partner hand is opposite 1NT opener you must consider only MW, devalutation for honors not protected and longness and revaluted when a fit has found inserting shortness (Goren points) more. Are used for slam RKB and Kickback (with the same schale of RKB used for) while on direct bidding at third level (nat.) cue-bid (not ultheriorly detailed).

[Lovera]

Where instead bid developing is more different is in part "4.4.4 Splinter after a minor suit transfer" when applying the asking for suit control. There is showed Hand A (..from a club competition..) in three different situations (Examples 1, 2, 3 with 4♥ as splinter). Instead bidding changes in 3♥ with answer 3NT for Examples 1 and 2 and via Kickback you end in 6♣ for Ex. 1 and 5♦ for Ex. 2 whilest for Ex. 3 3♥(=ask for cover)-3♠(=only spade is covered and not diamond) ending in 4 or 5 clubs.

[Lovera]

About holding with 4 cards and an honor in the case of super-accept the author talk about in No Trump book addictions (see New sheet) at the end of Table of content (index of book). Here a my example :North ♠ AKx ♥ Qxxx ♦ Kx ♣ Axxx South ♠ x ♥ KJxxxx ♦ AQx ♣ KJx Bidding: N-S 1NT-2♦, 3♥(=SA)-4NT, 5♠-6♥. A case to consider is also when you have an holding of three cards usually with a top honor but if instead you have two top honors this one can be bidded as four cards it be almost equivalent to.

[Vampyr]

What book are you talking about?

[Lovera]

Vampyr, on 2016-July-09, 09:28, said:

What book are you talking about?

The book indicated in post #3.

[Lovera]

As i've already told my aim is to simplify this complex system in a way (that you can redifine as like ultheriourly) for using non restricted at few partner(s) that know conventinated biddings in. Also in Ch. V my indicated biddings flow. Strangely, considering the many types of these ones, the (i.e. when transfer on diamond suit) "1NT - 2NT, 3NT" seems off. But it can be not so. For instance, when i've spoken by my indication of holding of three cards with two tops honors (to consider as a four cards suit) this can solve for you eventually bidding problem. On the same theme we can consider the support, rare but possible, having four cards and two top honors (AK, AQ or KQ). In this case you must priorly indicate it broken-the-transfer (3NT instead of 3♣ or 3♦) meaning (this one is another my optional adjuntive information) that all major suits are covered plus this extra support or when a major alone is covered (i.e heart) indicating it (3♥ covered, spade not plus this extra support).