[foobar]

Kit Woolsey's book describes a 1M - 2♣ GFR, but it resolves at +2, and resolves shapes before suits, which is a little odd.

It seems like we can do better using this scheme inspired by SCUM (by ulven).

1M - 2♣ (GFR)
....2♦: 5332 OR 4oM OR any 5-5
...............2♠: 4oM -> symmetric with 3♣+
...............2N: Balanced shapes
...............3x: 5-5; maybe run on 3♥+ for high/low short
....2♥: 6+ single suited -> resolve at +1
....2♠:4♦ -> symmetric with 3♣+
....2N: 5440 shapes
....3♣: ♣, high short
....3♦: ♣, 5422
....3♥: ♣, 5431, low short
....3♠: ♣, 6421, low short
....3N:♣, 6430, low short
....4♣: 74xx

This does give up on some LL shapes, but it's probably worth the tradeoff. Once shape is resolved, we can use flag bids to set the trump suit, after which opener's cheapest bid shows a minimum hand (this is only at the 3-level). Alternatively, it's possible to use the usual QP / DCB ask well.

[awm]

Our method gives full resolution on the 5-5 hands as well, which seems a bit better. After 1♠:

2♦ = 4+♣ or major one-suiter without any shortness (includes 5044 short hearts)
... 2♠ = one-suiter without any shortness
...... 3♣ = 6(322)
...... 3♦ = 53(32)
...... 3♥ = 7222
...... 3♠+ = 5233
... 2NT+ are symmetric with 2NT+ below
2♥ = 4+♦ (symmetric with 2NT+ below, includes 5440 short clubs)
2♠ = 6+♠ single suiter with shortness somewhere
... 3♣ = some 6(331) with 3♦ asking shortage
... 3♦ = some 7(330) with 3♥ asking shortage
... 3♥ = 71(32) high shortage
... 3♠ = 7213/7312 middle shortage
... 3NT = 7(32)1 low shortage
2NT = 5/5 majors or 5404 short in diamonds
... 3♦ = high shortage or 6511
... 3♥ = 5404
... 3♠ = 5521
... 3NT = 5530
... 4♣+ = 65 low shortage
3♣ = 4♥, high shortage
3♦ = 5422
3♥ = 5431
3♠ = 6421
3NT = 6430
4♣+ = 7-4

Basically we gain on the 5+/5+ hands where we get full resolution (at +1) while coming out even on the other two-suiters. We lose a bit on the one-suited hands. One trick that we use to help some in these auctions is to have an early relay break to show shortness (0-1) in opener's major. This allows us to assume a fit when opener shows 6+M, making bypassing 3NT safer.

[foobar]

awm, on 2021-December-24, 03:07, said:

Our method gives full resolution on the 5-5 hands as well, which seems a bit better. After 1♠:

Very nice, this presumably works in conjunction with 1♠ - 2♦ as potentially LR with 3-card support. Is 1♠ - 2♥ NF with 6+, or is it some sort of constructive raise?

[awm]

foobar, on 2021-December-24, 12:08, said:

Very nice, this presumably works in conjunction with 1♠ - 2♦ as potentially LR with 3-card support. Is 1♠ - 2♥ NF with 6+, or is it some sort of constructive raise?

I've posted this before (a long time ago) but our responses to 1♠ are:

1NT = semi-forcing, will not have 3+♠, if 2♠ then normally 8+ points
2♣ = GF relay, or 5+♥ and a sound invite
2♦ = artificial; either a sound invite with fewer than 5♥ and fewer than 3♠, or a non-slammish GF with 3+♠
2♥ = (possibly aggressive) limit raise in spades (3+♠); 4+♠ can make another call after opener's 2♠ rebid
2♠ = normal single raise (wide range, not particularly constructive)
2NT = mixed raise of spades
3♣,3♦,3♥ = less than invitational with 6+ suit and less than 3♠
3♠ = preemptive raise
3NT = 4+♠ and shortness somewhere, min GF, slam interest opposite "the right maximum"
4♣/4♦/4♥ = 4+♠ and shortness, slam interest opposite "the right minimum"
4♠ = to play; in principle could be a good hand but we use this less frequently than most strong club players

[foobar]

awm, on 2021-December-24, 12:39, said:

I've posted this before (a long time ago) but our responses to 1♠ are:

1NT = semi-forcing, will not have 3+♠, if 2♠ then normally 8+ points
2♣ = GF relay, or 5+♥ and a sound invite
2♦ = artificial; either a sound invite with fewer than 5♥ and fewer than 3♠, or a non-slammish GF with 3+♠
2♥ = (possibly aggressive) limit raise in spades (3+♠); 4+♠ can make another call after opener's 2♠ rebid
2♠ = normal single raise (wide range, not particularly constructive)
2NT = mixed raise of spades
3♣,3♦,3♥ = less than invitational with 6+ suit and less than 3♠
3♠ = preemptive raise
3NT = 4+♠ and shortness somewhere, min GF, slam interest opposite "the right maximum"
4♣/4♦/4♥ = 4+♠ and shortness, slam interest opposite "the right minimum"
4♠ = to play; in principle could be a good hand but we use this less frequently than most strong club players

Yes indeed...thanks for jogging my memory. My recollection of it was that the 2♣ structure was different, but it's been so long, and the past two years have been longer .

[foobar]

awm's structure inspired me to tweak it to address some weak points:

1M - 2♣ (GFR)
....2♦: 5332 OR 4oM OR any 5-5 without ♣
............2♠: 4oM -> symmetric with 3♣+ for short-legged shapes
............2N: 5/5 oM or 5440 with void in ♦ -> then follow 3♦+
............3♣: 5M332
............3♦+: As 5-5 ♣ below
....2♥: 6+ single suited -> resolve at +1
....2♠:4♦ -> symmetric with 3♣+
....2N: 5/5 clubs OR 5440 with void in oM
...........3♦: 55 OR 65 high short -> then follow 3♠+
...........3♥: 5440 with void in oM
...........3♠: 5=2=1=5
...........3N: 5=3=0=5
...........4♣+: 65xx with low-short
....3♣: ♣, high short
....3♦: ♣, 5422
....3♥: ♣, 5431, low short
....3♠: ♣, 6421, low short
....3N:♣, 6430, low short
....4♣: 74xx

[awm]

foobar, on 2021-December-25, 16:57, said:

awm's structure inspired me to tweak it to address some weak points:

1M - 2♣ (GFR)
....2♦: 5332 OR 4oM OR any 5-5 without ♣
............2♠: 4oM -> symmetric with 3♣+ for short-legged shapes
............2N: 5/5 oM or 5440 with void in ♦ -> then follow 3♦+
............3♣: 5M332
............3♦+: As 5-5 ♣ below
....2♥: 6+ single suited -> resolve at +1
....2♠:4♦ -> symmetric with 3♣+
....2N: 5/5 clubs OR 5440 with void in oM
...........3♦: 55 OR 65 high short -> then follow 3♠+
...........3♥: 5440 with void in oM
...........3♠: 5=2=1=5
...........3N: 5=3=0=5
...........4♣+: 65xx with low-short
....3♣: ♣, high short
....3♦: ♣, 5422
....3♥: ♣, 5431, low short
....3♠: ♣, 6421, low short
....3N:♣, 6430, low short
....4♣: 74xx

All you've really done here is to move the one-suiters from resolving at 2♠+2♠ to 2♥+3♣, which is neutral as far as steps, while making the 2♦ rebid a less cohesive set of hands. It may appear a bit better because the sequences over 2♥ are more familiar, but the structure we have allows for better quick decisions to blast games and also for relay breaks, because we know more about opener's hand early (after 1♠-2♣-2♦ in your structure, you almost have to bid 2♥ because the set of possible hands is so diverse). It seems like basically a wash to me (and of course won't work in our style where 2♣ includes invitational hands with hearts).

[foobar]

awm, on 2021-December-26, 08:38, said:

All you've really done here is to move the one-suiters from resolving at 2♠+2♠ to 2♥+3♣, which is neutral as far as steps, while making the 2♦ rebid a less cohesive set of hands. It may appear a bit better because the sequences over 2♥ are more familiar, but the structure we have allows for better quick decisions to blast games and also for relay breaks, because we know more about opener's hand early (after 1♠-2♣-2♦ in your structure, you almost have to bid 2♥ because the set of possible hands is so diverse). It seems like basically a wash to me (and of course won't work in our style where 2♣ includes invitational hands with hearts).

Completely agree with the technical merits of your version, but I didn't steal it wholesale since it was being marketed to relay noobs, and I didn't want to overwhelm with too many "either / or" branches .