[Kungsgeten]

Playing 1D as natural unbalanced, what would/do you play the 2NT response as? We currently play it as a natural invite, but have other ways to invite with 4D and 3-3-2-5, so the only hand that "has to" respond 2NT is an invitational hand with 3-3-3-4.

Our current responses:

1D--
1M = Natural
1NT = Artificial, less than GF: 3-3-2-5, 6+C or 5+S-4+H.
2C = GF relay. GF hands with diamond support or primary clubs has to bid this way.
2D = Simple raise, may be 3D.
2M = Natural INV.
2NT = Natural INV.
3C = Diamond limit raise.
3D = Diamond mixed raise.
3M = Void splinter.
3NT = 3-3-4-3, 13-15.
4C = Void splinter.

I'm considering using the 2NT response as a preemptive diamond raise, and 3-3-3-4 / 3-3-2-5 INV will be bid the same way (via 1NT). It seems though that there should be room for some other meaning in the 2NT response too.

[Zelandakh]

As an extra raise of some kind. It matters less whether it is preemptive/mixed/limit/whatever than that you have options to make further decisions easier. The other meaning that I see somewhat often is a hand with both minors but that tends to be more suited for nebulous 1♦ systems.

[PrecisionL]

An option is to play it similar to Jacoby 2NT, Game Force asking for the singleton/void.

[dokoko]

Kungsgeten, on 2017-July-13, 08:09, said:

Playing 1D as natural unbalanced, what would/do you play the 2NT response as? We currently play it as a natural invite, but have other ways to invite with 4D and 3-3-2-5, so the only hand that "has to" respond 2NT is an invitational hand with 3-3-3-4.

Our current responses:

1D--
1M = Natural
1NT = Artificial, less than GF: 3-3-2-5, 6+C or 5+S-4+H.
2C = GF relay. GF hands with diamond support or primary clubs has to bid this way.
2D = Simple raise, may be 3D.
2M = Natural INV.
2NT = Natural INV.
3C = Diamond limit raise.
3D = Diamond mixed raise.
3M = Void splinter.
3NT = 3-3-4-3, 13-15.
4C = Void splinter.

I'm considering using the 2NT response as a preemptive diamond raise, and 3-3-3-4 / 3-3-2-5 INV will be bid the same way (via 1NT). It seems though that there should be room for some other meaning in the 2NT response too.

I don't like your 1NT and 2♣ responses. IMO you should use 2NT to take ambiguity out of 2♣. If opps come in with a major, it might be difficult to sort out otherwise.

[spotlight7]

Kungsgeten, on 2017-July-13, 08:09, said:

Playing 1D as natural unbalanced, what would/do you play the 2NT response as? We currently play it as a natural invite, but have other ways to invite with 4D and 3-3-2-5, so the only hand that "has to" respond 2NT is an invitational hand with 3-3-3-4.

Our current responses:

1D--
1M = Natural
1NT = Artificial, less than GF: 3-3-2-5, 6+C or 5+S-4+H.
2C = GF relay. GF hands with diamond support or primary clubs has to bid this way.
2D = Simple raise, may be 3D.
2M = Natural INV.
2NT = Natural INV.
3C = Diamond limit raise.
3D = Diamond mixed raise.
3M = Void splinter.
3NT = 3-3-4-3, 13-15.
4C = Void splinter.

I'm considering using the 2NT response as a preemptive diamond raise, and 3-3-3-4 / 3-3-2-5 INV will be bid the same way (via 1NT). It seems though that there should be room for some other meaning in the 2NT response too.

Sabine Auken uses 1D-1H* as natural 5+ or some invitational hand playing her 4M canapé style bidding.

It seemed strange at first, however, it works very well.

[Kungsgeten]

dokoko, on 2017-July-13, 14:15, said:

I don't like your 1NT and 2♣ responses. IMO you should use 2NT to take ambiguity out of 2♣. If opps come in with a major, it might be difficult to sort out otherwise.

If the opponents come in with a major over 1D-1NT it isn't that bad, responder either has the majors (and thus the opponents are in a misfit or a bad split), or he has clubs. It will often be clear for opener what to expect, but sure mistakes can happen.

If the opponents interfere after 1D-2C we might be off to a bad start, which is true for many relay methods. At least we've established a GF.

A more common treatment is to play 1D-1NT as a GF relay, and 1D-2C as natural non-forcing with 5+C. That might be superior, but we didn't really want to bid a non-forcing 2C with 3-3-2-5 hands, since many times we will belong in diamonds.

[Kungsgeten]

PrecisionL, on 2017-July-13, 11:45, said:

An option is to play it similar to Jacoby 2NT, Game Force asking for the singleton/void.

We're able to ask for singleton/voids by going the 2C route, but it might be good to be able to show GF values and support directly.

[Kungsgeten]

Zelandakh, on 2017-July-13, 10:46, said:

As an extra raise of some kind. It matters less whether it is preemptive/mixed/limit/whatever than that you have options to make further decisions easier. The other meaning that I see somewhat often is a hand with both minors but that tends to be more suited for nebulous 1♦ systems.

A good thing about making 2NT the weak bid is that it is more seldom we belong in 3NT, and thus opener (the stronger hand) will be able to declare a 3NT contract more often if the 3C and 3D raises are stronger than 2NT.

One version I think I saw somewhere was 2NT showing a preemptive raise, or a GF raise with 5-5 in diamonds and a major.

[yunling]

Kungsgeten, on 2017-July-14, 14:55, said:

A good thing about making 2NT the weak bid is that it is more seldom we belong in 3NT, and thus opener (the stronger hand) will be able to declare a 3NT contract more often if the 3C and 3D raises are stronger than 2NT.

One version I think I saw somewhere was 2NT showing a preemptive raise, or a GF raise with 5-5 in diamonds and a major.

I doubt if it is the case. Opener often has a major shortage so with a probable 3-1 fit it might be important for responder to be the declarer in order to guard that suit.

[dokoko]

Kungsgeten, on 2017-July-14, 14:51, said:

If the opponents come in with a major over 1D-1NT it isn't that bad, responder either has the majors (and thus the opponents are in a misfit or a bad split), or he has clubs. It will often be clear for opener what to expect, but sure mistakes can happen.

If the opponents interfere after 1D-2C we might be off to a bad start, which is true for many relay methods. At least we've established a GF.

A more common treatment is to play 1D-1NT as a GF relay, and 1D-2C as natural non-forcing with 5+C. That might be superior, but we didn't really want to bid a non-forcing 2C with 3-3-2-5 hands, since many times we will belong in diamonds.

We use this:
1NT = transfer, 5+♣, usually 6♣ (but 3325 shape poss) when less than inv
2♣ = constructive+ raise, can be slightly less than inv when holding 4+♦
2♦ = "dubious" raise, usually 3-4♦, less than inv (not 4♦+max), might be 3325-shape
2NT is nat+inv, 3♦ is preemptive

[Kungsgeten]

dokoko, on 2017-July-15, 01:33, said:

We use this:
1NT = transfer, 5+♣, usually 6♣ (but 3325 shape poss) when less than inv
2♣ = constructive+ raise, can be slightly less than inv when holding 4+♦
2♦ = "dubious" raise, usually 3-4♦, less than inv (not 4♦+max), might be 3325-shape
2NT is nat+inv, 3♦ is preemptive

We played something very similar when we used 1D-1H as two-way: hearts or a GF relay. We then had:

1NT = Clubs.
2C = Weak or GF diamond raise.
2D = Constructive diamond raise.
3C = Limit raise.
3D = Preemptive.

If I remember correctly we then changed so that 2C was a weak diamond raise or invitational with 6M, and the GF diamond hand had to relay.

[Phil]

What I play:

1♦ - 1N = GF Relay. Nothing else is useful IMO.
1♦ - 2♣ = clubs, zero to an invite. It really doesn't come up that much since the opponents are usually in there with the majors.
1♦ - 2♦ = simple raise, not that much different than 1M - 2M, but can be a lot weaker
1♦ - 2♥ - invites - usually balanced
1♦ - 2♠ - 5♠/4♥ - invitational. Pretty important since opener is never rebidding a 'natural' 1N.
1♦ - 2N - inv + raise
1♦ - 3♣ - invitational with clubs
1♦ - 3♦ - mixed
1♦ - and higher - varieties of splinters.

[Zelandakh]

Phil, on 2017-July-18, 16:59, said:

1♦ - 1N = GF Relay. Nothing else is useful IMO.

1♦ - 1♥ = INV+ relay
1♦ - 1♥; 1♠ = min, <4 spades unless 4441(4450
1♦ - 1♥; 1♠ - 1NT = GF relay
1♦ - 1♥; 1♠ - 2m/M/NT = nat, INV
1♦ - 1♥; 1NT = 4 spades, <4 hearts
1♦ - 1♥; 1NT - 2♣ = GF relay
1♦ - 1♥; 1NT - 2♦/M/NT/3♣ = nat, INV
1♦ - 1♥; 2♣+ = extras, as per GF relay responses
1♦ - 1♠ = weak, nat
1♦ - 1NT = weak, 4+ hearts, <4 spades
1♦ - 2♣ = weak, 5+ clubs
1♦ - 2♦ = weak, 3+ diamonds
1♦ - 2♥ = CHOOSE from weak, 5♥4♠; or nat WJS (*)
1♦ - 2♠ = CHOOSE from INV, 5♠4♥; or nat WJS
1♦ - 2NT+ = various raises

(*) Note, if you choose WJS here, it works best to respond 1♠ (not 1NT) with the weak 5♥4♠ hand.

Gives you everything from a 1NT GF relay system plus some. The downside is that you are more liable to disruption but, for me, this type of structure is just much more efficient than the GF relay version despite the latter being more popular.