[1eyedjack]

ONEferBRID, on Oct 14 2010, 02:47 PM, said:

There is a "distribution-ask" system where Responder does not show his shape but asks for Opener's distribution:

1NT - 2S! ( GF and asks Opener to show distribution )

The series of replies -- all below 3NT --allows Opener to show:
  4-4 in the Majors
  4-4 in Major/minor and identifying each suit
  5 minor or
  any 4 3 3 3 ( and next identifying the 4 card suit )

Responder can either show his fit if found
or sign-off in 3NT. Also, Responder is not restricted to that shape.

One restriction is that Opener will not hold a 5 card Major.

What this system appears NOT to be able to show, as far as I can tell from this post, is the extent to which opener has or has not got wasted values opposite responder's shortage

[ONEferBRID]

1eyedjack, on Oct 14 2010, 10:02 AM, said:

ONEferBRID, on Oct 14 2010, 02:47 PM, said:

There is a "distribution-ask" system where Responder does not show his shape but asks for Opener's distribution:

1NT - 2S! ( GF and asks Opener to show distribution )

The series of replies -- all below 3NT --allows Opener to show:
  4-4 in the Majors
  4-4 in Major/minor and identifying each suit
  5 minor or
  any 4 3 3 3 ( and next identifying the 4 card suit )

Responder can either show his fit if found
or sign-off in 3NT.  Also, Responder is not restricted to that shape.

One restriction is that Opener will not hold a 5 card Major.

What this system appears NOT to be able to show, as far as I can tell from this post, is the extent to which opener has or has not got wasted values opposite responder's shortage

True... about wasted values.
I admit, I have only seen it used a few times.

[aguahombre]

The thing about Adam's use of 2NT (which has been around for many years), is that IMO Responder should be describing, not asking.

That is why the 2NT (either a club bust or 4X1 slammish) is effective.

[ONEferBRID]

Here is a 4 5 0 4 hand that would go thru Smolen and end up in a horrible 3NT contract ( down on the normal Diam lead ) :

Q T x x
A T 9 x x
void
Q J x x

A x x
Q x
Q x x
A K x x x

Now here is a "distribution-ask" sequence:

------pass
1NT - 2S!
3S! - 5C

where 3S! = 5c and denies a 4 card Major.
( 3NT! would show 5d and no 4 card Major ).
( and 3C etc would have started to show cheapest bid 4 card suits ).

[1eyedjack]

ONEferBRID, on Oct 14 2010, 07:18 PM, said:

Here is a 4 5 0 4 hand that would go thru Smolen and end up in a horrible 3NT contract ( down on the normal Diam lead ) :

Q T x x
A T 9 x x
void
Q J x x

A x x
Q x
Q x x
A K x x x

Now here is a "distribution-ask" sequence:

------pass
1NT - 2S!
3S!  - 5C

where 3S! = 5c and denies a 4 card Major.
( 3NT! would show 5d and no 4 card Major ).
( and 3C etc would have started to show cheapest bid 4 card suits ).

Well, give opener instead something like

xxx
Kx
KQx
AKxxx

and you have just gone down in 5C when 3NT while not stony cold has at least the best chance of any game.

Or give opener instead something like

Kx
KJx
AJx
Kxxxx

and you might regret not being in 4H, especially at Matchpoints.

I agree that Smolen does not handle this hand well, but then I am not a fan of Smolen for pretty much this reason: It does not get the minor suit shape across.

That does not make the distribution ask the answer to your problems, as these alternative hands demonstrate.

A sensible approach would still use responder to describe, but describe something a bit more than Smolen achieves.

In my preferred methods I would have to leave some ambiguity between 4-5-1-3 and 4-5-0-4 before committing beyond 3N. A price I have reluctantly to pay as the lesser of other evils

[ONEferBRID]

1eyedjack.... You are right... I completely overlooked missing a possible 5-3 Ht fit in my example.
Sooo, on that hand, I could have opted for the Smolen auction.

However, if Responder's hand been 4 4 1 4, I could have used the "distribution-ask", although I would have gotten into trouble in 5C if Opener has 3 losing Sp ( as you pointed out ).

So maybe it isn't such a great idea afterall ... at least for marginal game hands where the combined hcp is not high enough to justify the 5-level.

[aguahombre]

awm, on Oct 12 2010, 01:18 PM, said:

Ideally you'd have a way to show three-suiters like this. In my partnerships I do; Elianna and I play Walsh responses to notrump which include:

2NT = puppet to 3♣, either signoff in clubs or any GF 4441 hand
.... opener bids 3♣
......... now pass with club signoff, or bid shortage with GF 4441 (so here 3♦)

After the 2NT puppet:
Try the effect of "suit below", rather than bidding the singleton. (3sp=stiff club, 3N=stiff diam or 4C=stiff diamond too strong to allow 3NT). What this does, is allow opener to set trump directly with green light for slam --but relay thru the stiff before setting strain with a devalued or weaker NT opening.

[FrancesHinden]

Zelandakh, on Oct 13 2010, 02:43 PM, said:

show (4441) and (13)(45) hands over a 1NT opening. Playing 4-way transfers makes it simple to use the 3-level bids for this kind of hand without playing anything particularly non-standard. If you do not play them (I don't as it happens) then you need to design your system very carefully.

Exactly

1NT - 2C (?5CM)
2D - 3C*
3D** - 3H

*Either 3-suited with short diamonds, or game forcing with 4 hearts and no slam interest
**forced
3H = 4414

[1eyedjack]

ONEferBRID, on Oct 14 2010, 10:00 PM, said:

So maybe it isn't such a great idea afterall ... at least for marginal game hands where the combined hcp is not high enough to justify the 5-level.

It is not just the marginal game hands. If responder has a full-blooded GF then it tends to be a marginal slam hand - again contingent on whether opener has wastage opposite the shortage

[skjaeran]

1NT-3♦, showing a singleton.