[metobillc]

Does the following convention already have a name, and regardless, is it superior to both Michaels and Ghestem?

After the opponents open 1 of a suit:
2N = 2 lowest unbid
Q bid = 2 highest unbid
Jump overcall in minor (1♣-2♦ or or 1♦|♥|♠-3♣) = that minor + highest major

Seems easier to remember than Ghestem, the minor jump always promises that suit, so it can be passed, making it more difficult for the opps, and the 2 suits are always specified, unlike in Michaels.

You have to give up the minor suit jump overcall, of course, which isn't trivial.

[1eyedjack]

metobillc, on 2014-September-29, 16:37, said:

You have to give up the minor suit jump overcall, of course, which isn't trivial.

You also have to give up on unlimited 2-suiters where the system bid is in one of your suits.

Not saying that the method is bad, but let's get all the downsides on the table.

[metobillc]

1eyedjack, on 2014-September-29, 22:52, said:

You also have to give up on unlimited 2-suiters where the system bid is in one of your suits.

Not saying that the method is bad, but let's get all the downsides on the table.

Yes, that's a downside. So with lowest and highest, you would need to overcall the minor, then bid spades (possibly hearts) later. And if you want to play a continuous range rather than weak or strong, it's a bit worse.

[fromageGB]

I'm happy playing this - I call it questem - and if you do sometimes forget, as I did early on and make a weak jump overcall in the minor, it is not a disaster.

[1eyedjack]

fromageGB, on 2014-October-01, 09:57, said:

I'm happy playing this - I call it questem - and if you do sometimes forget, as I did early on and make a weak jump overcall in the minor, it is not a disaster.

Provided that partner does not give preference

I echo the sentiments, however that it seems a reasonable method.

[mgoetze]

The worst thing about Ghestem is that you are forced to the 3 level with the hand that is most important to show, both majors. So you have an obvious improvement here.

Personally I do not like giving up a jump to 3m - if partner is in love with specific 2-suiters I will instead suggest to play only 2 of them and have one unbiddable 2-suiter. After all, if you have spades and a minor, you're often better off overcalling 1♠ anway.

[fromageGB]

mgoetze, on 2014-October-02, 18:54, said:

Personally I do not like giving up a jump to 3m - if partner is in love with specific 2-suiters I will instead suggest to play only 2 of them and have one unbiddable 2-suiter. After all, if you have spades and a minor, you're often better off overcalling 1♠ anway.

This is not a bad idea. While I do play the method, I seem to not use it for the extreme suits including spades, only when the extreme major is hearts, ie I use the 3♣ bid only over a 1♠ open, when you are likely to want to compete to 3♥ if that is the fit. It does seem foolish to cause the level to go unnecessarily to 3♠ over their potential 2♥ contract.

[blackshoe]

RHO opens in a red suit. You have a decent hand with four spades and five clubs. How do you show it?

[fromageGB]

blackshoe, on 2014-October-04, 06:46, said:

RHO opens in a red suit. You have a decent hand with four spades and five clubs. How do you show it?

(1♥) 1NT raptor = 4 spades + 5(+) unspecified minor
(1♦) X : because I play natural 1NT over a minor. If all pass apart from partner who bids hearts I bid spades and by inference show the clubs. (Edit: this has to be only 4 spades, but clubs could be longer.)

(In both cases I would bid 1♠ with 5xx5.)