AL78, on 2020-April-11, 07:58, said:
Why does responding 2♦ promise at least five but 2♣ only needs four? What is the advantage?
Living in predominantly Acol country, I have never heard of this style of bidding before. Everyone I know responds 2 minor on four or more, and 2♥ promises at least five.
In 2/1, the 2 clubs response is artificial, and can sometimes be made on as few as three (in some partnerships two!) clubs. It's quite standard to require a five card suit for 2
♦ and 2
♥. The idea is that it is often advantageous to first establish that we are going to game, and to describe the shape of our hand afterwards. Making such a GF bid also allows partner to describe their shape freely, regardless of strength. In a 2/1 system, holding for example KQxx AKxx Ax Qxx opposite partner's 1
♠ opening the first bid would be 2
♣, intending to support the spades on the second round and starting slam investigations possibly as low as at the 2
♠ level. Depending on your agreements on what a direct 2NT and 3NT overcall mean, you also have to bid 2
♣ with weaker hands (replace the K and/or Q of spades with a small one, and most players have some special bid for this. But if you lack one, it's 2
♣ again).
This also protects partner if we do bid 2
♦/2
♥, since they can now support with a 3-card suit. It is quite standard to play a repeat of 2M by opener as a 'garbage' bid, 2NT as extra values and any new suit as a real suit with a shapely hand (but not necessarily showing extra values). This gives responder a very clear picture of opener's hand, often below 2NT. This has all kinds of advantages, for example when looking for minor suit slams, right-siding 3NT or deciding on 3NT versus 4M in a 7-card 'fit'.
Also I think if west gets to open the bidding the sequence suggested by mikeh earlier sounds completely correct. 1
♥-2
♦-3
♦-3
♥-5
♣, which is either Exclusion Blackwood (and the partnership proceeds scientifically after this, but reaching 7
♦ is very realistic after this fantastic start) or a general invite for slam in either red suit with a void in clubs. Again as an aside: I find it very useful to play 'Serious NT' in sequences like this, where it is beyond silly to suddenly bid 3NT in light of the known double fit and general values. Therefore 3NT is available to mean "extra values, but no clear bid", and any new suit can mean shortness, instead of just control. With my regular partner 4
♣ would already mean at most one club, so the jump to five is a void even when not playing Exclusion. But even without ace-asking bids I think after this clear start the partnership should be able to reach 7
♦, as mikeh did.