[blackshoe]

Romex used to open these hands 2♦, making it a three way opening (natural diamonds GF, balanced 21-22 or 27-28, or strong 3 suited). Then they switched to opening it 1♣ not vulnerable (and playing the Romex Forcing Club) or 1NT vulnerable (playing Romex). A few years later, they dropped it from the system on the grounds that it doesn't come up often enough. I'm not sure how Romex would handle them if they do come up, but based on this history, I would say opening strong 2♣ (when playing Romex) is not an option. Probably 1NT and hope to recover.

NB: the 1NT opening in Romex is artificial and forcing, showing 19-20 HCP balanced with six controls, or 18-21 HCP unbalanced with six controls and 4-5 losers.

[kenberg]

I figured there were probably approaches other than "I just pray that I don't get that hand". But so far the prayer system has worked out.

[Fluffy]

pooltuna, on 2010-November-24, 13:53, said:

strikes me as weird as "dar" literally translates for me as "give" So I would assume you were the teacher. Of course you are the native speaker of Castillian and I cannot come up with words for take lessons ("tome clase" ???)

Yeah its a bit weird, it probably because we don't give or take lessons, we say "dar clase" wich literally means "give the classroom" wich has no sense.

We have a specific verb for giving lessons, "impartir (lecciones)". However it is lesser known and rarelly used.

[gordontd]

Fluffy, on 2010-November-24, 12:35, said:

Aprender = learn
Enseñar = teach

however

Dar clase = give lessons OR take lessons, when I tell people I give lessons they often think it is the contrary.

Take a class can be used in both senses in English, though I think it's more often used by students in USA than in UK.

[NickToll]

babalu1997, on 2010-November-23, 13:29, said:

Well I have never seen any textbook or teacher tell anyone to open 2 clubs to rebid a 4 card suit.

In "Bridge in the 80s" R. Sundby described the then-current version of Breakthrough Club. In that system 2♣ was strong, artificial and forcing (but not to game), including unbalanced hands only. Responses were relatively natural:
2♦: no 5card major, any strength
2♥, 2♠: 5card suit, any strength
2NT: 8+, balanced, no 4card major (with some exceptions)
3♣: 8+, positive, good 5card or longer suit
3♦, 3♥, 3♠, 4♣: six cards headed by two of the three top honors
3NT: any solid suit

Over 2♦, opener's rebids were canapé-style: 2♥ and 2♠ promised four or more card, possibly with a longer minor, whereas 3♣ and 3♦ showed a long and strong suit and 2NT was rebid with a minor 2suiter. Negative rebids by responder: 2NT after 2♦, or 3 of the major suit shown in response, or 3♥ over opener's 3♣ or 3♦, or a 3level preference over opener's 2NT: other rebids positive and natural.

I have no significant experience in bidding this way, and would be curious to hear from others about it.

[mycroft]

1) arguments for majors-first for 2C opener's rebid are valid, if there's enough room to resolve it all, which I have no idea about.
2) 4333 hands suck in the play, 4441 hands suck in the auction. That's been known since Roman Club. The answers are always:
2a) find a bid you feel you can afford to lose/muddle, and stick 'em in there (Precision "impossible negative", now "impossible positives", Roman 2D), or
2b) lie. How to handle the outfall if the lie, is a very interesting question, and always depends on the circumstances. If there is no lie that isn't dangerous, start looking at 2a).

Having said that, 2C-2D-2M-3M must show positive support, and xx (or even Hx) isn't it. Find another bid; partner's not going to be happy when he gets to slam off one ace with his "solid" AKQxx (or worse yet, off no aces with AQ9xx). If your system doesn't give you a forcing bid that you can show secondary support on the third round if you think it best, invent one. If "show support for 2C bidder's suit" isn't priority 1.001 (after "my suit is such that we're playing in it even with partner's fit", but then wouldn't you have bid it directly?), such that third-round support could be "primary support", fix that.