[bluenikki]

 Liversidge, on 2019-December-30, 09:51, said:

Neil Rosen was written about this in the EBU's bridge magazine. He advocates the 100% GF version but acknowledges the drawback you mention - he says "As a result we often have quite a tough choice as to what to bid with various invitational hands, sometimes having to guess to bid no trumps without a full stopper".

"without full stopper" indeed! how about with 432?

[nige1]

 bluenikki, on 2020-January-01, 15:53, said:

"without full stopper" indeed! how about with 432?

On the left is is CyberYeti's problem hand for South.
If 4th-suit is G/F, then, over 2♣, South has a hard rebid problem
Admittedly, 2N is an awkward kludge, without a ♥ stop.
Unfortunately, however, bidding isn't an exact science,
Although, luckily, sometimes, 3N is a playable contract.

---

[bluenikki]

 nige1, on 2019-December-30, 06:31, said:

4SFG (4th suit forcing to game) is simple and consistent, which outweighs any possible theoretical disadvantage.

Simple to *describe*. Not the same as simple to play.

[bluenikki]

 nige1, on 2020-January-01, 17:43, said:

On the left is is CyberYeti's problem hand for South.
If 4th-suit is G/F, then, over 2♣, South has a hard rebid problem
Admittedly, 2N is an awkward kludge, without a ♥ stop.
Unfortunately, however, bidding isn't an exact science,
Although, luckily, sometimes, 3N is a playable contract.

---

On this auction, are you sure 2NT is least of evils? I would have thought default rebid is false preference.

[nige1]

 bluenikki, on 2020-January-01, 18:16, said:

Simple to *describe*. Not the same as simple to play.

It's simpler to describe and simpler to play. But is it more effective? That's the bone of contention.