[apollo1201]

JLilly, on 2019-January-01, 16:48, said:

If you use the "gap" bid in your minor transfers as the negative response and the completion of the transfer as the superaccept, you can roll the weak 55 minors and invitational 55 minors hands into the minor transfers, freeing up 3♣ for puppet. The treatment below assumes that the suit quality of the invitational 55 hands is such if opener has a club holding good enough to superaccept the single-suited club transfer, you go to game. I just came up with this; there may be something I missed. . ..

1N-2♠ = clubs (weak, inv, strong); or 5-5 inv
. . . . . . . 2N = I don't like clubs
. . . . . . . . . . 3♣ = signoff
. . . . . . . . . . 3♦ = 5-5 inv in the minors, how about diamonds?
. . . . . . . 3♣ = I like clubs
. . . . . . . . . . pass = signoff
. . . . . . . . . . 3♦ = whatever you use that for (e.g., shortness with slam interest)
. . . . . . . . . . 3N = 5-5 inv, accepted; or clubs inv, accepted
1N-2N = diamonds (weak, inv, strong), or 5-5 weak
. . . . . . . 3♣ = I don't like diamonds
. . . . . . . . . . pass = 5-5 weak minors; signoff
. . . . . . . . . . 3♦ = signoff
. . . . . . . 3♦ = I like diamonds
. . . . . . . . . . pass = signoff
. . . . . . . . . . 3N = diamonds inv, accepted
1N-3♣ = puppet
1N-3♦ = 5-5 GF

Since 1N-2♠; 2N-3♦ is used to show a 5-5 inv hand after answering negatively about clubs, it means you can't use it for responder to show some diamond feature (shortness, etc.) having a very strong club suit with slam interest even opposite a rejection of the club transfer. I think this is better than losing that ability when opener has an acceptance of the club transfer, since in that case, slam is more likely.

Seems good and logical, but with I never managed to know if the price to pay (using Stayman for invitational hands w/o majors and disclosing opener’s distribution) was too high of not to cover all the benefits

[JLilly]

apollo1201, on 2019-January-02, 13:25, said:

Seems good and logical, but with I never managed to know if the price to pay (using Stayman for invitational hands w/o majors and disclosing opener’s distribution) was too high of not to cover all the benefits

Right -- my post was meant just to address the OP's concerns. I don't think I've encountered a structure that accomplishes all of (1) keeping garbage/crawling Stayman, (2) not using Stayman for quantitative invites, (3) using regular Stayman (not Keri etc.), (4) standard Jacoby transfers, (4) allowing quantitative invites, (5) giving 1NT opener a vote on the minor transfers, (6) having a puppet Stayman bid, (7) showing 5-5 minor hands---weak, invitational, and GF, and (8) keeping two 3-level responses for various major-related features (such as 3M showing (31)(45), or 5-5 major hands).

I suppose you could overload the major transfers, maybe like this:
Invert the meanings of 1NT-2♦; 2♥-2♠ (4=5 invitational) with 1NT-2♦; 2♥-2NT (5 hearts, invitational). 1NT-2♦; 2♥-2♠ now is ostensibly the 5-heart invitational hand. Opener declines with 2 hearts and a minimum with 2N. This leaves room for responder to enquire about opener's spade holding, or various other things. With 3+ hearts and/or a maximum, opener makes various other 3-level bids that I haven't worked out. You add some artificial bids for opps to double, although puppet does that anyway. You also can't stop in 2♠ when responder is 4=5 and opener has four spades and a minimum hand, although this is a "bonus" -- in general, invitations take the pair to at least 2N.

[fromageGB]

rhm, on 2018-December-23, 11:47, said:

First of all starting Gazilli with 15 HCP is problematic in my view.
You may have no fit , with Gazilli you can not play 2C or 1NT with a 5 card major ...

When you play a forcing NT you have lost the ability to play in 1NT, and those who choose to play this way think that the benefits outweigh the disadvantages - but that's another discussion. Given that you cannot play in 1NT, this is not an argument. If you play "natural" rebids after 1NT, and repeating the major shows 6 cards, you are really forced to rebid 2♣ when you have no club suit in the accepted sense, perhaps being a doubleton. Gazzilli does not therefore lose a natural bid.

rhm, on 2018-December-23, 11:47, said:

...and 15-17 HCP and 1NT might well be the best contract when you do not have a major suit fit.

Yes, it surely may be. But when responder is not strong enough to reply to your 1NT open, having no long suit, 1NT may well be a terrible contract compared to 1M played on a 5-2 fit. Often, though, they take the same number of tricks, which is why I prefer in MPs that 1NT excludes a 5 card major, and in IMPs it may include. When it includes, I thoroughly agree with you that the 5 cards are best not revealed.