[peachy]

Playing 2/1, incl. NMF.
1D - 1S
1NT - 2C
3C -

3C is a systemically undefined bid as a response to NMF, as far as I know. By logic, I came to a conclusion what it means - or should mean, and I bid it.
Do you have an agreement what it means?
If no agreement, what do you think it means in an expert partnership?

I'll post the whole hand and our perpetrations in a separate post later.

[Hanoi5]

Maybe it can be used to show a 1=3=5=4 pattern (also 2254?) with maximum HCP, but is NM forcing to game?

Maybe you could also agree to use it to show 3♠ support with club cue-bid, club singleton or club suit, again with Max HCP.

I don't have any agreement though and I prefer to play checkback (or 2-way checkback) than NMF.

[pooltuna]

peachy, on Sep 23 2009, 01:56 PM, said:

Playing 2/1, incl. NMF.
1D  - 1S
1NT - 2C
3C  -

3C is a systemically undefined bid as a response to NMF, as far as I know.  By logic, I came to a conclusion what it means - or should mean, and I bid it. 
Do you have an agreement what it means?
If no agreement, what do you think it means in an expert partnership?

I'll post the whole hand and our perpetrations in a separate post later.

well let's see what it denies; 3♠ & 5♦. I am inclined to believe partner is showing either a 2443 or a 2344 hand which raised ♣ because of no ♥ stopper.

[jdonn]

Is the genius answer going to be a maximum with three spades and good club values, like Qxx Kx Axxx KQTx?

I haven't thought of your auction but it reminds me of another, just our side bidding.

1m 1♠
1NT 2♥

3 of either minor should show a maximum for hearts and show values, essentially saying to partner bid game if short in the other minor, sign off if short in this one. You could be Ax KJTx KQJx xxx or Ax KJTx xxxx KQJ and have game if partner is short in your weak minor, especially if he is 5-5.

[Jlall]

2254 maximum.

a 2D response is non forcing, so you cannot bid that with a max, and 3C is more descriptive than 3D when you are 2254.

[WesleyC]

In an expert partnership without discussion it would be natural(ish) and showing a maximum.

For what its worth, in a serious partnership I'd prefer to just play a better version of checkback rather than making obscure NMF responses like this artificial...

[Codo]

To me it would be a 2344 with no clear stopper in heart.

With xy54 I had simply rebid 2 CLub instead of 1 NT.
With 2443 I had bid 2 Heart instead of 3 Club.
With 2353 I had tried 2 Diamond instead of 3 Club.
With balanced values in a balanced hand I had rebid NT.
With max. and 3 spades I had bid 3 Spade.

[andy_h]

Natural and a maximum seems most intuitive, so 2254.

[Free]

I guess it should be natural and maximum => 2=2=5=4.

I've played systems where every 3-level bid shows maximum, 3 card support for opener's suit, and is natural descriptive. In this case it would show a 3=2=4=4 maximum hand.

[kenrexford]

The best answer to this question would be "whatever we agree that it means."

But, an on-the-fly meaning can be discerned, perhaps, so long as there is some understanding of a few preliminaries.

For one, what is your agreement as to 1NT rebids in this sequence? Do you frequently raise spades? Does a spade raise on three promise 3451 shape ("reverse" pattern but not strong enough to reverse)? Do you avoid bidding 1NT at all costs with a stiff in spades (bidding 2♣, for example, with 1444 or maybe even 1453 with terrible diamonds)?

If 2♣ is NMF, is 2♦ GF NMF?

Does 2♣ focus spades (2♦ denying and then check on hearts later)? Does 2♣ focus spades but then immediately bid hearts (2♥ denies spades but shows hearts, 2♦ denies either)?

Does the partnership tend toward fit-bids earlier than most, or pattern bids more frequently than most?

[ONEferBRID]

peachy, on Sep 23 2009, 01:56 PM, said:

Playing 2/1, incl. NMF.
1D  - 1S
1NT - 2C
3C  -

3C is a systemically undefined bid as a response to NMF, as far as I know.  By logic, I came to a conclusion what it means - or should mean, and I bid it. 
Do you have an agreement what it means?
If no agreement, what do you think it means in an expert partnership?

I'll post the whole hand and our perpetrations in a separate post later.

I wonder if you have come up with the same agreemnt I have on this "special" NMF auction where Responder's first bid was 1♠.

The following is and EDIT since I srewed up the original reply.
I was replying to the following NMF auction ( which is not Peachy's):

1C - 1S
1NT - 2D!
3C! = 3s and 4h

Namely, for me 3♣! shows the following shape: 3 card Sp support AND 4 cards Hts ! !

Normally, 3C would show a 5 card Cl suit, since after 2C! NMF the following rebids would mean:
2D = 4d
2H = 4h
2S = 3s

Soo, if no 3s, no 4h, and no 4d, then opener is 2s, 3h, 3d, and 5c.

So why did I select 3C = 3s and 4h ??
Because Opener can bid 2NT ( with a min) or 3NT ( with a max) with the same 2 3 3 5 holding and same reasoning:
no 3s, no 4h, no 4d, ergo 5c ! !

And I figured you don't need TWO ways to show the SAME hand !

Edit: And it also works the same way if 1D were opened , 1S response and 2C! NMF.... try it .

[peachy]

ONEferBRID, on Sep 24 2009, 09:34 AM, said:

peachy, on Sep 23 2009, 01:56 PM, said:

Playing 2/1, incl. NMF.
1D  - 1S
1NT - 2C
3C  -

3C is a systemically undefined bid as a response to NMF, as far as I know.  By logic, I came to a conclusion what it means - or should mean, and I bid it. 
Do you have an agreement what it means?
If no agreement, what do you think it means in an expert partnership?

I'll post the whole hand and our perpetrations in a separate post later.

I wonder if you have come up with the same agreemnt I have on this "special" NMF auction where Responder's first bid was 1♠.

Namely, for me 3♣! shows the following shape: 3 card Sp support AND 4 cards Hts ! !

Normally, 3C would show a 5 card Cl suit, since after 2C! NMF the following rebids would mean:
2D = 4d
2H = 4h
2S = 3s

Soo, if no 3s, no 4h, and no 4d, then opener is 2s, 3h, 3d, and 5c.

So why did I select 3C = 3s and 4h ??
Because Opener can bid 2NT ( with a min) or 3NT ( with a max) with the same 2 3 3 5 holding and same reasoning:
no 3s, no 4h, no 4d, ergo 5c ! !

And I figured you don't need TWO ways to show the SAME hand !

Edit: And it also works the same way if 1C were opened , 1S response and 2D! NMF.... try it .

Your system is not the same as mine so it might work for you but it would not work for me. 1D opening is 4 cards unless specifically 4=4=3=2 hand and that hand would have raised spades, naturally. In my methods - which I thought were pretty much standard - 1D-1S-1NT-2C!-2D tends to show five card diamonds or six bad ones, denies 3-card spades and 4-card hearts.

[ONEferBRID]

I see that I have screwed up my original reply.
I was commenting on the auction:

1C - 1S
1NT - 2D!
3C! = 3s and 4h
where normally it would show 5c

...but the following auction would show 5c by default:

1C - 1S
1NT - 2D!
2NT ( or 3NT w/max)

where Opener has denied 3s, 4h, and 4d
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

But for your auction:
1D - 1S
1NT - 2C!
3C = 4c and would deny 3s and deny 4h

[awm]

I'm consistently amazed that 2-way new minor force is both simpler and more effective and yet so many players continue to play regular NMF.

In any case, to find a semi-official answer I looked through my copy of Modern Bridge Conventions by Root and Pavlicek. Their interpretation is that raising the new minor is natural and denies a stopper in the other major. They give an example for 1♦-1♠-1NT-2♣-3♣:

♠Ax
♥xxx
♦KJxx
♣AQxx

This hand is not suited to bidding 2♥ (shows four) or 2♠ (shows three). While I'm sure some would rebid in notrump, the three small hearts which were no problem for a 1NT rebid might create an issue in 3NT (say partner has ♠KQJxx ♥xx ♦Axx ♣Kxx).