[blml] convention

[Wayne Burrows]

On 20/12/06, Sven Pran <svenpran at online.no> wrote:
> > So in your opinion a response to Stayman showing exactly four
> > hearts/spades ; a weak two showing exactly six-cards; a weak three
> > showing exactly seven cards are all conventions.  Is this correct?
>
> You got it the wrong way round!
>
> If the definition of a non-conventional bid for instance was that it shows
> exactly 4 cards on the one-level, 5 cards on the two-level and 6 cards on
> the three-level then a bid that by agreements shows 5 or more cards on the
> one-level, 4 cards (Stayman response) or 6 cards (weak two) on the two-level
> and 7 cards on the three-level would indeed be conventional. However, when
> the definition says "at least 3 cards" or "at least 4 cards" then the door
> is wide open for specifying a stricter agreement like at least 5 cards for
> an opening bid in majors on the one-level. See the difference?
>

Not at all.  Is this a wind-up?

Why do you allow a more stricter agreement for suit length but not for
high-card strength?

Wayne