thats a good point i would totally agree. we should ask the inventors of the fit jump bid why they decided it to show a 4-card support, whoever they are.
So where does the natural 2NT bid come into the picture?
Do they bid it naturally- because 2NT is being used as 4+ fit INV+? so you have to cuebid first and then hope to rebid 2NT?
I guess that is another problem. Playing 3♦ as inv. does not solve that. You will have to cue with very strong hands anyway. as you commented later you will have to play play 2♦ as 1RF to avoid this, but then you lose weaker hands to show ...
having said that, can you please explain why you prefer it? why can't you show that hand by a 2♦ bid? and what does your 2♦ bid mean when you play 3♦ as inv.?
Thanks
Yes I have forgotten the natural invitational option and cant change the poll now. But is not "natural and invitational" hand included in the 2♦ bid, which is NF but Overcaller in invited to bid something if not minimum? I mean why can't you bid 2♦ with ...
when playing semi-forcing 1NT one cannot pass 1NT response with hands that would accept a game invitation from responder. so there is this awkward situation that occurs when you have to rebid 2C with a 4531 hand, because when you bid 2D you must have 4+ D. so as you ...
hello
I am writing a book on gazzilli and xyz conventions in Turkish, with the prospects of publishing (hopefully).
just shortly, my version of gazzilli is different and i use 2C rebid just to show the hands that are problematic, that is usually intermediate hands. my principle is bid naturally ...