Jacoby 2NT or show your own suit?

[cnszsun]

You play 2/1 system and use a more complicated version of Jacoby 2NT which can show your partner's extra value, extra trump length and shortness.

Now your partner opens 1 major, you have four trumps support, a good 5 cards suit, and GF strength. Will you respond 2NT or bid your own suit first (supposing your side suit is lower, so you can make 2/1 forcing bid first, then show suport)? Do the suit quality or hand pattern (5422,5431) affects your decision?

[the hog]

Depends on the quality of the 5 card suit. I am loth to hide a suit that has good trick taking potential, and would ALWAYS show a 5 carder headed by KJ or better, even with 4 card support for partner.

 

This concept ties in well with picture bids and Serious, (or frivolous 3N). See the thread where Misho and Ben are hashing out their system:

 

http://bridgebase.lunarpages.com/~bridge2/...=15entry19215

[mishovnbg]

Agree with Ron, showing bad side suit when you have fit is not good idea. Suit must be good enough to not lose more than 1 trick in it with fill of 1H in p hand. For example Qxxxx is not enough good suit imho, already discussed in 2/1.

 

 

-----------------------------------------

Misho

[joker_gib]

I agree with Misho. :rolleyes:

 

I play a system where 2NT is GF and we only bid a side suit if it's AK, AQ or KQ fifth.

 

Alain :D

[Free]

I totally agree with all responses. I think it's the standard aproach...

[inquiry]

Show your own suit and then support, this is true unless your own suit is weak.

 

You can add to this, should you show your own suit or make a splinter bid. Say you have 4531 distribution with 4 card support. Again, if your suit is strong, show your own suit. If you suit is weak, and your hand is in the right HCP range for a splinter, then splinter becomes reasonable.

 

Ben

[Trpltrbl]

I guess I stand alone, but we have at least a 9 card major suit fit. Why showing your own suit ? Is it going to do any good ? Not in my eyes, and pd will pretty much never expect 4 card support. Support with support and help pd out. If pd has shortness in your suit, you want to find out directly, also if pd has shortness in other suit.

And last but not least, why help opps ? Roadmapping the defense is never good, but pls continue this nonsense against me, I like it.

 

Mike B)

[Flame]

I guess I stand alone, but we have at least a 9 card major suit fit. Why showing your own suit ? Is it going to do any good ? Not in my eyes, and pd will pretty much never expect 4 card support. Support with support and help pd out. If pd has shortness in your suit, you want to find out directly, also if pd has shortness in other suit.

And last but not least, why help opps ? Roadmapping the defense is never good, but pls continue this nonsense against me, I like it.

 

Mike B)

if you open 1sp holding

KXXXX

X

AKXX

KJX

 

parner responde 2c

you rebid 2d and partner 2sp.

now even without a sefisticated slam bidding ,you can RKB and if p have AQ of spade and 2 aces you can bid 7, counting 13 tricks.

now show me how you do that after 2nt.

[Trpltrbl]

if you open 1sp holding

KXXXX

X

AKXX

KJX

 

parner responde 2c

you rebid 2d and partner 2sp.

now even without a sefisticated slam bidding ,you can RKB and if p have AQ of spade and 2 aces you can bid 7, counting 13 tricks.

now show me how you do that after 2nt.

My pd bids 2NT, and I bid 3♦, shortness. Am sure my pd is happy with that, since he now knows that I have a ♣ fit. So he bids either a quebid or RKC and with all he needs to know, he can even find out about my K of ♣.

 

Mike B)

[Trpltrbl]

if you open 1sp holding

KXXXX

X

AKXX

KJX

 

parner responde 2c

you rebid 2d and partner 2sp.

now even without a sefisticated slam bidding ,you can RKB and if p have AQ of spade and 2 aces you can bid 7, counting 13 tricks.

now show me how you do that after 2nt.

And how can I possibly count 13 tricks ? On a ♣ finesse at best. Like I said come on down and try to beat me with bidding like that. Of course the ♣ finesse might always work for you, but when I bid a Grandslam I like to be fairly sure I will make it, since my teammates are not that forgiving.

 

Mike B)

[Flame]

I gave you this example when i was declarering in 3nt (down 1) so it wasnt the best example, but still ill bid 7 here which will have lots of chances.

Lets try another example:

 

KXXXXX

AX

AX

KQX

 

vs

 

AQXX

XX

XX

AJXXX

 

my bidding -

1sp - 2c

2sp - 3sp

4nt - 5sp == two aces + the Q of trump

7sp == counting to 13

 

now you show me how you bid this to 7sp after 2nt.

when you do that remember that partner can have

 

AQXX

QXX

QXX

AXX

when you can only take 11 tricks.

or can have

 

AQXX

KQX

QXXX

XX

 

again only 11 tricks here

 

sry for changing this post so many time, Ben you probebly seen another version of this.

[inquiry]

When I disagree with you I will tell you so... :-0, but FLAME is 100% right here, and the example hands illustrate the point nicely. Sorry mike, but this is clear.

 

Ben

[Free]

~snip~

now you show me how you bid this to 7sp after 2nt.

when you do that remember that partner can have

 

AQXX

QXX

QXX

AXXX

when you can only take 11 tricks.

or can have

 

AQXX

KQX

QXXX

XXXX

 

again only 11 tricks here

 

sry for changing this post so many time, Ben you probebly seen another version of this.

These hands are getting worse every time! These days partner can have a 4-3-3-4 distribution, as well as a 4-3-4-4... :( :D

[Flame]

~snip~

now you show me how you bid this to 7sp after 2nt.

when you do that remember that partner can have

 

AQXX

QXX

QXX

AXXX

when you can only take 11 tricks.

or can have

 

AQXX

KQX

QXXX

XXXX

 

again only 11 tricks here

 

sry for changing this post so many time, Ben you probebly seen another version of this.

These hands are getting worse every time! These days partner can have a 4-3-3-4 distribution, as well as a 4-3-4-4... :( :D

lol i changed it so many times. ill corect.

[mishovnbg]

I gave you this example when i was declarering in 3nt (down 1) so it wasnt the best example, but still ill bid 7 here which will have lots of chances.

Lets try another example:

 

KXXXXX

AX

AX

KQX

 

vs

 

1.

AQXX

XX

XX

AJXXX

 

my bidding -

1sp - 2c

2sp - 3sp

4nt - 5sp == two aces + the Q of trump

7sp == counting to 13

 

now you show me how you bid this to 7sp after 2nt.

when you do that remember that partner can have

 

2.

AQXX

QXX

QXX

AXX

when you can only take 11 tricks.

or can have

 

3.

AQXX

KQX

QXXX

XX

 

again only 11 tricks here

 

sry for changing this post so many time, Ben you probebly seen another version of this.

 

--------------------------------------------------

Hi flame!

 

Examples can't be used as a prove, only as possibilities. The reason is if you can't see how something can be happen (bidded) it does'n mean it can't be done. And way you bid something is not nessesary right way (and your bidding is not right by 2/1 system for example, because you didn't have slam interest to bid 3♠). Modification of examples can lead to easy missing slam by natural system, for example will you still bid ♣, if they are only 4 cards, but you have K more? As I posted I like to bid bidable suits if possible by my system. BUT!

Of course it is possible to reach much more difficulte slams, playing realy systems, even with not so efficient like MOSCITO, but easy like NTC.

 

Examples of NTC bidding:

 

1.

1♠{10-17, 5+♠} - 2NT{inv+, 3+fit}

3♥{max,6♠,deny singleton/void} - 4♣{cue}

4♦{cue} - 4NT{even KC, deny ♥ control, slam interest}

5♣{cue, ♥ control, KC enough for slam, missing Q ♠ or KC enough for grand} - 5NT{ Q♠, deny another cue, interest for grand. Note if not 5♣ cue, then 5♠ instead of 5NT - deny slam)

6♣{cue(Q♣), KC enough for grand} - 7NT(6♠+2A+5♣}

 

 

2. Note look 1. for meaning of bids.

1♠ - 2NT

3♥ - 4♣

4♦ - 4♠ {deny ♥ control, not enough good hand for 4NT}

 

3. Note look 1. for meaning of bids.

 

1♠ - 2NT

3♥ - 4♥

5♣{cue,control ♦,odd KC} - 6♠ {6♠+3♥+1♦+1♣+1♣ ruff or 4th Q♦ usefull}. I am not best declarant, but this slam that you dont like to play is easy even for me :( .

 

 

------------------------------------------------------------

Misho

[Fluffy]

So the question here should be mainly focused on wich kind of suit you think has enough quality to be bid, I agree with misho, KJXXX is good enough while QXXXX is not.

 

What about AXXXX, KXXXX and QJXXX? are they good enough?.

 

On the other side..... with 5-4-3-1 with what I consider a not so good suit I am sure I would 100% use splinter and not jacoby, anyone disagrees with that?

[mishovnbg]

So the question here should be mainly focused on wich kind of suit you think has enough quality to be bid, I agree with misho, KJXXX is good enough while QXXXX is not.

 

What about AXXXX, KXXXX and QJXXX? are they good enough?.

 

On the other side..... with 5-4-3-1 with what I consider a not so good suit I am sure I would 100% use splinter and not jacoby, anyone disagrees with that?

 

-------------------------------------------------------

Hi fluffy!

 

 

------

It is very easy to decide is your suit enough good. Main rule is with any partner's TH(AKQ) fill in this suit you will give max 1 trick to opps.

In your examples:

 

Axxxx or Kxxxx is not enough opposite Qxx, because you can give 2 tricks there.

QJxxx is an exception, because opposite Kxx or Axx you can't give more than 1 trick, but you don't have control in bidded suit, while looking for slam - depend of your partnership agreements. Shortly any 2 of 4 honours is enough. Repeating such suit as cue bid show I honuor more to total of 3. Same bidding allow to catch some unusual slams on side/trump suits or NT like AKJxx<->Q or even AKQxx<->J, because your parner know, that even singleton honour means solid suit it this case.

 

 

-------

Modern treat of Splinter convention is: limit raise to level of splinter, where singleton is already count as source of ruffing tricks ( distributional points). This mean with honour strength for jacoby 2NT you can't use Spliner. There are different methods to bid with such hands. One of them is to change one of useless bergen raises to show exactly this type of hand, how it is in Rumen-Kalin system.

 

 

-----------------------------------------------------------

Misho

[inquiry]

So the question here should be mainly focused on wich kind of suit you think has enough quality to be bid, I agree with misho, KJXXX is good enough while QXXXX is not.

 

What about AXXXX, KXXXX and QJXXX? are they good enough?.

 

On the other side..... with 5-4-3-1 with what I consider a not so good suit I am sure I would 100% use splinter and not jacoby, anyone disagrees with that?

I posted this answer above at Ben's first reply to this thread. I will repeat it here. If your suit is weak (Kxxxx), and if you hand is narrowly defined within the range you use splinters (say 12-14 "points" counting distribution, or whatever your standard is), then a splinter is perfect. If you have a good hand, however, use 2NT. You can't allow splinters to include barely good enough for game hands and slam interest hands, or your bidding really will suffer.

 

Ben

[Trpltrbl]

KXXXXX

AX

AX

KQX

 

vs

 

AQXX

XX

XX

AJXXX

 

my bidding -

1sp - 2c

2sp - 3sp

4nt - 5sp == two aces + the Q of trump

7sp == counting to 13

 

now you show me how you bid this to 7sp after 2nt.

when you do that remember that partner can have

 

AQXX

QXX

QXX

AXX

when you can only take 11 tricks.

or can have

 

AQXX

KQX

QXXX

XX

 

again only 11 tricks here

 

sry for changing this post so many time, Ben you probebly seen another version of this.

♣On first example most won't bid J2NT with 11 count, my wk NT pd and I play 2NT as Inv or better. But the question was for J2NT, so I will bid 2♣, a slight overbid maybe but with my good ♠ fit and 2 aces, I'll try game. I bid 3♣, pd will bid 3♠, and I will bid 4♦. Pd RKC and asking specific Kings and we get to 7♠.

 

Now the 2nd example, pd will use J2NT, and I bid 3♠, showing no shortness or 2nd long suit and better then minimum hand. Now pd can see we have somewhat duplicate hands, since that's what I showed. He can now bid 3 NT, showing a balanced 4-3-3-3, and a decent hand. Conventions are nice but common sense you need otherwise you will not win in bridge.

 

3rd Hand, again J2NT, again 3♠ (same as above). This hand is better then 2nd hand, therefore pd might bid 4♥. I will bid RKC and end in 6♠. I will make 12 tricks. only have to ruff 1 ♣.

 

Mike :D

 

P.S. you can search many many hands and eventually you might find a hand where your gambling pays off better then my bidding, but at that point I will be up about 1000 imps anyhow :lol:

[Trpltrbl]

When I disagree with you I will tell you so... :-0, but FLAME is 100% right here, and the example hands illustrate the point nicely. Sorry mike, but this is clear.

 

Ben

You still agreeing 100% ?

 

Mike :lol:

[Flame]

Hi misho

The point in the examples is to deliver a message, its best understand when you see an example, and those examples were ment to show why it is importent for the opener to know about a good 5 card side suit, which is a source of tricks.

From my expirence bidding slams is done best when you amagine or sometimes know where are the tricks going to come from, this is extremly true when talking about grands. counting tricks is easier when partner show his suit.

You can see many rookies bid slams after checking they got the necassary controls, so they are right , they dont have 2 quick losers, but sadly they dont have 12 winners either. for a slam you need a source of tricks.

In modern style cue bidding and other non natural bidding are used after a major suit fit is found, i play like that too, but i am not certain its better then a natural way. example 1sp-2sp-4c maybe this can be better to show a 5-5 hand then for splinter as most play it?

[inquiry]

When I disagree with you I will tell you so... :-0, but FLAME is 100% right here, and the example hands illustrate the point nicely. Sorry mike, but this is clear.

 

Ben

You still agreeing 100% ?

 

Mike :lol:

I still agree with Flame, and disagree with you you.

 

Let me handle your "examples" and you 1000 imp lead. Where I disagreed with you was your statement earlier (not your latest statement), where you said...

 

I guess I stand alone, but we have at least a 9 card major suit fit. Why showing your own suit ? Is it going to do any good ? Not in my eyes, and pd will pretty much never expect 4 card support. Support with support and help pd out.

 

This statement from your early reply suggest you always raise with four card support..."to help your partner out"... Now you ahve jumped ship and state to example one by FLAME....

 

On first example most won't bid J2NT with 11 count, my wk NT pd and I play 2NT as Inv or better. But the question was for J2NT, so I will bid 2♣, a slight overbid maybe but with my good ♠ fit and 2 aces, I'll try game. I bid 3♣, pd will bid 3♠, and I will bid 4♦. Pd RKC and asking specific Kings and we get to 7♠.

 

Wow,,, you go from not bidding a side card suit with four card support to bidding a side suit with good four card support in less than one day. Seems you changed your mind very quickly aoubt helping partner out. I note another thing here. You also turned me on to ZAR points, and here you will "try for game" (I assume this means make a game try). But this responder hand is worth a lot of ZAR points, on its own it has 27 ZAR points, and in support of ♠, you get two more for AQ of ♠, and some for 9 card superfit too. This is a game forcing hand, not game try hand, and is not at all far of from a slam try DESPITE its mere 11 hcp. You total ZAR points counting superfit being something like 31 I believe. I can't imagine you would use language like "try for game."

 

I don't follow your subsequent auctions to the second two, but like you, i will respond with 2NT to both of those, and then drag my feet like crazy after that, because I have minimum GF values, unlike the first example.

 

BTW, ZAR bidding machine says 7.0 ♠ on all three hand combinations, and that just can't be right....in the case of the third combination, since you are off the ♣ACE (blackwood anyone), but 6♠ looks good to me....

[hv=w=skxxxxxhaxdaxckqx&e=saqtxhkqxdqxxxcxx]266|100|[/hv]

Win 6♠ 3♥ 1♦ 1♣ and 1♣ ruff. The second hand combination is more problematic. There is no source of tricks, but with good guess in a red suit (and well placed king), you might scramble how with 12 tricks.

 

Anyway, I bid 2♣ on board one and jacoby on board 2,3, just as you have done in your latest post. And I still DISAGREE with your origianlly stated position of raising directly with four trumps...as you know apparently do too.

 

Ben

[Flame]

Mike i think you are laying to yourself here, trying to find excuses and missing the point. All three hands i gave you have 4 card fit, all have about the same streagh and all have no problem loosing 2 fast tricks (meaning no cue bidding will help much here) what distinguege this hand is the playing tricks avaliable from the club suit on the first hand and not on the other 2 which you wont find in system of showing shortage or cuer bidding.

[bearmum]

You play 2/1 system and use a more complicated version of Jacoby 2NT which can show your partner's extra value, extra trump length and shortness.

Now your partner opens 1 major, you have four trumps support, a  good 5 cards suit, and GF strength. Will you respond 2NT or bid your own suit first (supposing your side suit is lower, so you can make 2/1 forcing bid first, then show suport)? Do the suit quality or hand pattern (5422,5431) affects your decision?

Maybe I don't understand "more complicated" Jac 2NT :P WHY would you bid your own suit BEFORE telling partner you have FOUR card support (and I believe in ANY form of Jac 2NT) at LEAST 12 points ??? :lol:

 

 

UNLESS you mean the "which can show your partner's extra value, extra trump length and shortness" to mean that OPENER can show extra value extra trump length and shortness in which case I am TOTALLY confused :D :P :o

[the hog]

"Maybe I don't understand "more complicated" Jac 2NT"

 

This has nothing to do with a complicated or simple version of Jacoby. If you are looking for a contract higher than the game level, it helps to know that you have a source of tricks. Look at the following hand

 

AQxxxx

Axx

x

Kxx

 

The bidding goes 1S 2C 2S 4S. Playing the style where your 2C bid shows a suit, you have an easy try for 6S, because you know that your partner has AQxxx in C.

How will you get there after a Jacoby 2N?