[Bbradley62]

gnasher, on 2011-February-28, 14:46, said:

I'm not talking about what I say when explaining the bid at the table. When I am asked to explain a bid to my opponents, I explain it, so the question wouldn't arise.

What I was talking about was exactly the situation you are talking about - when someone on this forum uses the word "Drury". Are you really trying to tell Fluffy and RHM that they shouldn't use the unmodified term "Drury" unless they play it as exactly the same strength as what you consider the norm?

By the way, I notice that your list of authorities excludes The Bridge World, whose definition of the method is the admirably unprescriptive "a two-club response by a passed hand to show a fit for partner's major in a hand too strong for a single raise".

Yes, I am suggesting that the unmodified term "Drury" should be understood to mean the convention as devised by Mr. Drury. Using it to mean something similar (even if very similar) should be accompanied by a brief explanation so that your audience will know what you mean.

The unabridged BridgeWorld description is:
Drury
(1) originally, a two-club response by a passed hand to show maximum values;
(2) in its more modern form, often called Drury-fit, a two-club response by a passed hand to show a fit for partner's major in a hand too strong for a single raise.

Drury-fit
See: Drury (meaning 2).

[rhm]

Bbradley62, on 2011-February-28, 13:21, said:

Of course, the directors will tell you that it is never adequate to simply use a convention name to explain a bid, despite the fact that it is standard practice. I would not be surprised if you found yourself in a long discussion with a director after an opponent claims he was led astray by your "misinformation".

However, my objection in this thread was that OP told us we were playing Drury, my first reply said "(p)artner has made a limit raise in spades" and someone else said "I don't think that Drury shows necessarily a limit raise". Although you certainly can agree with your partner to play a customized version of Drury, if you have agreed to play Drury and you have made no such customizing agreement (which I presume OP would have disclosed), then it shows a limit raise.

What you do not understand is that Drury encompasses limit raises but the lower limit of Drury is weaker than for a limit raise and the reason is simple.
After Drury you can stop in 2 of a major, after a limit raise you can not. And if you play Drury it is useful that the single raise becomes better defined since its upper limit is slightly lower.
This is not a special agreement, it is fairly standard.

May I quote the Bridge Encyclopedia:

"The 2♣ bid asks opener (East) to clarify his strength. West might hold (after Pass -- 1♠)

♠Q92,♥1064,♦AK74,♣Q43

Without Drury West has no attractive action: a single raise is an underbid, a double raise with only three trumps and poor distribution is inappropriate...."

Nowhere does the Bridge Encyclopedia claim it to be a limit raise.

Rainer Herrmann

[blackshoe]

When you bid 2♣ in this sequence, you don't "promise" anything. You're asking partner whether he has a full opener. At least, that's how, as I recall it, Doug Drury intended it when he invented it.

[nigel_k]

Bbradley62, on 2011-February-28, 15:38, said:

Yes, I am suggesting that the unmodified term "Drury" should be understood to mean the convention as devised by Mr. Drury. Using it to mean something similar (even if very similar) should be accompanied by a brief explanation so that your audience will know what you mean.

The unabridged BridgeWorld description is:
Drury
(1) originally, a two-club response by a passed hand to show maximum values;
(2) in its more modern form, often called Drury-fit, a two-club response by a passed hand to show a fit for partner's major in a hand too strong for a single raise.

Drury-fit
See: Drury (meaning 2).

But you have refuted your own assertion because the convention as devised by Mr. Drury does not promise a fit yet you suggested, without elaboration, the sequence 1♠-2♣-4♠.

I think Drury is one of those things that is still evolving and cannot be tied down so strictly that allowing some extra hands in at the bottom end means it is no longer Drury.