[MickyB]

 Cyberyeti, on 2014-January-16, 08:41, said:

Playing Acol it's absolutely routine to bid 1♠

Agreed - but that is because you are much worse placed after 1H:2C [GF] than 1H:2C [F1]. I guess Acol players might be exempt from the remedial education; then again, playing Acol might in itself be sufficient justification for such measures!

[MickyB]

 the hog, on 2013-December-29, 19:54, said:

Adam: "If you accept that 1H-2C-2S need not show extras,"
Many, including myself do not accept that. Granted if you do accept it THAT particular problem is solved, but you create others further down the track.

Do you play 1S:2C, 2H as showing extras? If not, how do you solve the "problems" this creates? Is 1H:2C, 2S so different? This isn't the same as a reverse at the three-level, that clearly needs to be better defined.

Quote

Phil: This is where there is a difference in philosophy. My partners would expect long Cs for this bidding and may well support Cs on 3 cards. As I said, this is where I prefer a full realy structure.
However I guess you get the point, it is silly to make blanket statements as one poster did, without looking at the b. system as a whole and the partnership philosophy in uncontested auctions.

Playing 1H:2C as natural or balanced, may include four spades, is a really complex method with very artificial continuations. They are -

2D = four diamonds
2H = six hearts
2S = four spades
2N = balanced hand
3C = four clubs

With three-card "support" you make your natural rebid, hoping to bid 3C on the next round.

 awm, on 2013-December-23, 14:40, said:

With five spades I respond 1♠ (exception for 5♠-6m).

I think most playing this style prefer to respond 2m on (53)(32), hoping to show their three-card support for opener at the two-level on the next round.

[awm]

My style is a natural style that does not require special agreements; partner opened and I respond by bidding my longest suit. The fact that I choose to bid 2C and not 1S with 4-4 in the blacks is no different from those who would open 1C and not 1S with 4-4 in the blacks.

The concept of suppressing a FIVE card spade suit in order to instead respond in a three (or two!) card club suit strikes me as neither natural, nor common, nor playable without additional discussion.

[MickyB]

 awm, on 2014-January-16, 12:32, said:

My style is a natural style that does not require special agreements; partner opened and I respond by bidding my longest suit. The fact that I choose to bid 2C and not 1S with 4-4 in the blacks is no different from those who would open 1C and not 1S with 4-4 in the blacks.

The concept of suppressing a FIVE card spade suit in order to instead respond in a three (or two!) card club suit strikes me as neither natural, nor common, nor playable without additional discussion.

Yeah sorry I was probably confusing the implications of [responding 2m with 4S4m] with the implications of [responding 2C on all balanced hands GFs]