this would be SO easy if I had a 4th spade (or if I somehow knew partner didn't...)  The problem with the immediate cue is that, if I bid 3N next, P will assume I'm denying a H stop (not to mention showing a spade suit). I think I could deal with one false assumption, but both is a bit too far. My "least lie" may be to bid 2N, THEN cue the hearts over P's 3c...then run from spades until partner gives up? A really bad hand for partnership trust; maybe the straight 6N/hope for a squeeze is the most reasonable approach after all.

Hmmm...my copy of the Anderson book is in Texas, and I'm in Idaho for the forseeable future, but I remember being really irate at that statement; don't believe I'd mis-remember it. Maybe I have an older version, and he changed his mind on reflection? In any case, I certainly agree with you that 2S SHOULD be the signoff bid. If I ever get back home I'll look it up.  If I'm wrong I owe Anderson a profound apology: I have ranted about that inconsistency to anyone who would listen for many years.

This issue is apparently controversial: Anderson's Lebensohl book uses the relay, followed by 3S, as the signoff. He says the direct 2S is forcing, and explicitly states that you "can't get out in 2S." This strikes me as pretty silly: I prefer to use responses analogous to those used after a natural 2H overcall of our 1N: 2S is a signoff, 2N, followed by 3S, is invitational, and a direct 3S is GF. Very logical, IMHO, but the Anderson book means we have to discuss this specific auction when agreeing to play Leb. <sigh>

Yet again, I got an automated text threatening to remove "inactive" members from the rolls of IAC. As one who lurks, usually invisibly (stalker problem), I'm concerned that my non-participation in tourneys and team matches will be taken as a lack of interest, leading to my removal. I'm not quite sure what steps I can take, other than giving up and playing in the team matches, that will allay the suspicions/accusations that I don't belong here.  Suggestions welcome.

I was converted to Walsh in one easy lesson: Chapter 1 of Bergen's first book, Better Bidding with Bergen, Vol. 1.. He makes the case far better than I would ever claim to. A cursory glance at Walsh always seems to raise the specter of missing a 4-4 Major fit; it simply can't happen. When responder has the 4441 hand you mentioned, he still bypasses the diamonds to bid Hearts; but opener no longer has the luxury of ignoring a 4-card Spade suit. Both partners need to keep that in mind, and that 1c-1d-1H-1S has some "interesting" problems attendant: Is 1S a real suit? is it 4sf? does it deny a balanced hand? etc., etc. It's a rare hand that finds the 4-4 S fit after 1c-1d, but the sequence MUST show a GF responder hand, since he did not bypass the diamonds in round one. Since we set up the GF at the ONE-level, there's room to fool around to determine if the suit is genuine or not...in my favorite partnership, responder simply rebids his 4-card suit to confirm it really had 4 cards; any other bid shows a GF hand without 4 spades...simple but workable. The huge problem that we avoid is the weak hand with a 4-card Major and a long, weak d suit. Bidding the Major first, then running to 2d from 1N pretty much promises that sort of hand.

ran afoul of the posting software on this one: I had a reply typed out, hit "post," and was "warned" there was another response posted while I was typing, and suggesting that I take a look before posting. I did so, then tried to return to what I had, and it appears to have vanished into the ether, so trying to reconstruct the previous "brilliance." 

On Ken's first hand, I have a pet theory regarding Drury: I play in after any 1M in third position, but only after 1S in fourth (therefore don't shade 1H openers in 4th seat).  The rationale is that opening in 4th seat carries the risk of competing against the passout; and without the spade suit, opening is likely to awaken sleeping spades in somebody's hand. We then have the common problem of choosing to let the opponents play in 2S, losing to the passout if it doesn't make, or taking the push to 3H, losing to the passout if THAT doesn't make. I don't open the sort of trash in 4th that I do in third, even with the spade suit, but will cheat down a couple of points if I have a reasonable spade suit.

I guess that's enough responses that I don't have to feel like I'm the only one paying any attention, so...

I was one of the first few members of what was originally the 2/1 club, in the dear old days of ChinaMike, DocHelm, ChasP and others...the intent was to screen out beginners and Goren players, so we could find a game with relatively high standard, with a definite emphasis on 2/1. I objected to the name change, especially since there was already an "IAC" in the Public area, but stayed with it throughout. My goal is still the same, though: for the club to be a place to peek into, find a game with at least intermediate level players; NOT to sign up for tournaments and/or team matches. I used to rail against those folks intruding on a nice game to seduce some of our players into some meaningless (to me) team match, sometimes breaking up a game to do so.  More recently, there is almost never a game forming in IAC...either it is used as a staging area for team/tourney matches, or there is a pre-arranged game at which casual entry is unwelcome. That, plus the pernicious invasion of Precision (Sorry, Oliver...just my opinion: I won't play it, nor against it unless P and I have discussed a defense) has made it all but impossible to find a game in the club. I still make the club my first destination when I log in, and continue to look for a casual game there, but failing that I just wander off into other rooms.