[STNJN]

Playing 5 and strong , with inverted minor suit raises , and talking about the raise , just in Clubs , for convenience . After 1C - 2C 2H/S are game forcing 5/4 . 2NT 11-14 balanced . 3NT 18/19 balanced so you lose the ability to invite in NT. All I can think of is to bid step one as weak no trump giving up the 1C - 2C - 2D as a 5/4 C/D GF. Anyone got any other ideas

[Cyberyeti]

We play 1♣-2♣(inv+)-2♦ as GI or better artificial (but we play a 4 card club and weak NT so the weak NT hands are excluded)
2M is not GF
2N is diamonds and clubs

You have to cope with the weak NT hands so is more complicated

[STNJN]

Cyberyeti, on 2026-January-02, 10:56, said:

We play 1♣-2♣(inv+)-2♦ as GI or better artificial (but we play a 4 card club and weak NT so the weak NT hands are excluded)
2M is not GF
2N is diamonds and clubs

You have to cope with the weak NT hands so is more complicated

Thank you so much for the response .
So what would you say is the range on the 1C - 2C - 2NT bid showing C &Ds ?
Is the 1C - 2C - 2D any shape ?

[Cyberyeti]

STNJN, on 2026-January-02, 11:04, said:

Thank you so much for the response .
So what would you say is the range on the 1C - 2C - 2NT bid showing C &Ds ?
Is the 1C - 2C - 2D any shape ?

2N is NF and minimum 4-5m not good enough for the 2♦, it's almost any shape 3♣ is minimum, 3suit is 6♣-4suit non minimum, 3N is a balanced range

[mikeh]

STNJN, on 2026-January-02, 10:31, said:

Playing 5 and strong , with inverted minor suit raises , and talking about the raise , just in Clubs , for convenience . After 1C - 2C 2H/S are game forcing 5/4 . 2NT 11-14 balanced . 3NT 18/19 balanced so you lose the ability to invite in NT. All I can think of is to bid step one as weak no trump giving up the 1C - 2C - 2D as a 5/4 C/D GF. Anyone got any other ideas

Why are you investing so much into showing opener’s 4 card major? I know a few players who can hold a 4 card major for an inverted raise but it’s easy to demonstrate that this is a flawed idea.

Without by any means showing all of the reasons, consider this elementary exercise in bidding theory

1C 1M 2M. Fit found at the 2-level. 1C 1M 1N. Fit denied at the one level.

Your inverted minor: 1C 2C 2M 3M. Fit found at the 3 level.

Bidding space matters and loading 4 card majors into an inverted structure destroys a level of bidding space when you have a major suit fit.

Then the hidden cost. Players who espouse their idiosyncratic methods often fail to even acknowledge or recognize the hidden costs. What are they?

Well, if you play a very basic inverted minor structure, they’re not horrible. But that’s only because a basic inverted minor structure is an extremely inefficient method.

More sophisticated methods allow opener to describe various important features of the hand rather than simply bidding stoppers. Such as…balanced or unbalanced. Minimum or minimum or extras or lots of extras

The rationale for inverted minors is to find…drum roll please…minor suit contracts. Yes, notrump is often in the picture but when one has two balanced hands with, in combination, values for 3N, almost any bidding method works. It’s finding good minor suit games or, especially, slams where a good inverted minor structure works. By devoting 1C 2C 2M to looking for a major suit fit, one is using two economical bids that can be put to a much better use if 2C denies a major, as it does. (In my experience) for the majority of good players who use inverted minors.

I’ve posted my preferred inverted minor structure at least twice…invented by one of the all time great bidding theorists, it’s the best I’ve tried, and I’ve played quite a few inverted minor structures.

[Cyberyeti]

Inverted minors can work really well, but they depend on the system you are dropping them into.

Clearly there is a HUGE difference between what you can play if your club is always 4 and can't be minimum and balanced, and the US 2 card club strong NT type system.

I don't think you can play non GF inverted minors, allowing 4M in a strong NT setting, but you can easily in weak and we do.

[DavidKok]

mikeh, on 2026-January-02, 13:44, said:

I’ve posted my preferred inverted minor structure at least twice…invented by one of the all time great bidding theorists, it’s the best I’ve tried, and I’ve played quite a few inverted minor structures.

I've read the structure you posted before and think it's excellent, though I've come across structures that I consider superior. If I'm not mistaken I did write about them before, but I might be misremembering. It is worth pointing out that all these structures have something in common: they are quite a lot of work, but have excellent returns on that effort.

STNJN, on 2026-January-02, 10:31, said:

Playing 5 and strong , with inverted minor suit raises , and talking about the raise , just in Clubs , for convenience . After 1C - 2C 2H/S are game forcing 5/4 . 2NT 11-14 balanced . 3NT 18/19 balanced so you lose the ability to invite in NT. All I can think of is to bid step one as weak no trump giving up the 1C - 2C - 2D as a 5/4 C/D GF. Anyone got any other ideas

There are a lot of other ideas available, but they are not simple natural structures. I think it's good that you are showing shape (rather than stoppers). In general I think there's a huge gap between a beginner inverted minor structure, an advanced inverted minor structure and an expert inverted minor structure. My estimate is that your structure is advanced - you're establishing the degree of fit, the strength of the hands (demanding that a new suit bid is game forcing) and the hand type. If you want to push this structure with artificiality, there is a lot of room for improvement here! As an obvious example, if 1♣ is frequently 3 cards (or perhaps even 2), it is common to require that responder have 5(+) clubs for the inverted minor raise. It is rare that opener now has an unbalanced hand with primary clubs on an uncontested auction - one simply doesn't have 10-card fits¹ at the 2-level in uncontested auctions these days. So you might wish to compress certain unbalanced responses into a smaller artificial set, saving more space for bidding with different types of balanced hands.

Cyberyeti, on 2026-January-02, 15:04, said:

I don't think you can play non GF inverted minors, allowing 4M in a strong NT setting, but you can easily in weak and we do.

I think you can, though you may choose not to. The gains are limited and it only works in a system with quite a bit of effort put into it.


¹Some 4♣441 opposite 5♣ is possible but low frequency, normally unbalanced primary clubs means opener has 5(+) along with responder's 5(+).

[bluenikki]

mikeh, on 2026-January-02, 13:44, said:

Why are you investing so much into showing opener’s 4 card major?

It's Moyse's original issue. The Roth-Stoners insisted as a matter of religious faith that they must go down in 3NT or five of a minor, rather than making game in a 4-3 major fit.

What is wrong with opener showing a _strong_ major, along with a good 5+ minor? Those hands play wonderfully in a 4-3.