[straube]

rbforster, on 2012-December-04, 15:55, said:

I might restructure this to have the majors at +1 and the minors at +0, or closer to that anyway for the GF responses. Theres less space below 3N than 4M, and the minor hands are usually headed to 3N and hence could use a little more room. Also, by zooming into minor(s) with 2C+, you may avoid wrong siding NT. it's likely better to have opener, who is both stronger and less described, declaring 3N in these cases.

I'm sure you're right about both points. What do you think of the overall structure? So far I'm not fond of it.

Would you remind me of what your structure is? I know you've explained it quite a few times.

1D-0-7 or H+
.....1H-hearts or other minimums?
..........1S-0-7
...............1N-weaker
...............other-natural?
.....1S-natural?
.....1N-stronger-20 or so?

[rbforster]

straube, on 2012-December-04, 23:03, said:

Would you remind me of what your structure is? I know you've explained it quite a few times.

1D-0-7 or H+
.....1H min bal or min 1 suited (artificial)
..........1S-0-7
...............natural
.....1S min 2 suited (artificial)
.....1N 19-21
......2C any 22+
......natural 19-21

There are a bunch of tweaks and quirks, but that's the basic idea.