Success Factors and the Meckwell approach

One of the best sources of discussions on bidding theory is the "Non-Natural System Discussion" forum of BBO forums, at:
http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showforum=3

Recently, young US top expert player Justin Lall had a very insightful post http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=26392&st=0&#entry295163 ) on the Meckwell approach:

Having played a version of Meckwell's system for several years I can say that getting to the right partscore seems to be a low priority for them. You almost always get to a playable partscore, but often an inferior one. A lot of their system is based on being able to place the (game) contract as early as possible, giving away as little information as possible, while still having excellent tools and a lot of room available if you want to investigate slam. To me this is a winning style, and something missing in most systems.

A few years ago a senior top expert player told me, when I asked about his system design for part score choice, that "I’m too old for partscores", meaning his system work was designed for the game and slam success factors of IMPs.

Note the key points covered in Justin’s post:

- Non-disclosure is key
- Early identification of fit/spot
- At IMPs, partscore perfection is not a success factor

At MPs, we have:

- Non-disclosure is even more important
- Quick move to right spot to reduce non-disclosure risk
- Choice of partscore will be an important success factor