A good meta-agreement, IMO.
When Responder to a 1NT opening shows a two-suited hand, and Opener picks one, then Responder can indicate his shortness in a set agreement as to steps.
Step 1: low stiff
Step 2: high stiff
Step 3: low void
Step 4: high void
Step 5: no interest
Consider 1NT-P-3♦(majors)-P-3♥(hearts set). Responder can bid 3♠(1) for 5521, 3NT(2) for 5512, 4♣(3) for 5530, 4♦(4) for 5503, or 4♥(5) to sign off.
How about a transfer and then a minor? 1NT-P-2♦-P-2♥-P-3♦-P-3♥ works the same way. If Opener agrees diamonds in this sequence (4♦?), the same thing could work as well.
The same general principle might work in many other sequences. The key is that when one person shows a two-suited hand, and the other person agrees trumps by bidding the focus suit one level below game, shortness bids in steps can be bid through this meta-agreement. Of course, you want to know when shortness indication is more important and hence the partnership default, rather than cuebidding.
The suggested structure is not bad.
In such situations, my rule of thumb is that if the convention replaces some "potential" natural calls then it better be really useful.
First, after Jacoby Transfer-followed-three-of-a-minor, responder needs (may need) natural bids to further describe his long suits.
Second, there "should" be way to show 6-5-1-1 hands.
Maybe one day we'll have simulation software(s) which can analyze and tell us which feature is most important to show in the long run.
Once a fit is shown, I think length description is slightly less important than shortness description. If partner could have 6421, 6412, 5431, or 5413, and I already have a fit for the long suit, I think that I want to know which is the short suit most, to better assess cover cards.
I'm not sure of a solution for the 6511 problem.
Another related possibility is when one plays that: 1NT + 2S - is a transfer to 3C (which can be passed), or +3D - to be passed - weak, but:over the 3C rebid one can bid 3H/S - showing a singleton and possible slam interest (opener can sign off at 3NT or 5C), 4D - singleton/void in diamonds, 4H/4S - void - forcing opener to 5C at least.
IF one plays the 2S - 3C transfer - there really is No good reason not to have such (or similar bids), as one has chosen (for good reason) not to use Stayman or a Jacoby Transfer - with a rebid in a 2nd suit - such as one could do with: 4/5, 5/4 - major suits (with or without Smolen) - and show some 5/5 or 6/5 distributions with the Jacoby Transfer and another suit bid after the transfer.
There seem a lot of options following 1NT openers when responder is not balanced and has some strength.
With Larry we use low-high-none for our shortages, so this is a logical extension on that. I think with one under transfers (1NT-2D-2H-2NT* (clubs)) this maybe a powerful tool.
Post a Comment