strong jump?

[jillybean]

Playing SAYC; you hold

 

AKQxxx

Axx

xx

Kx

 

1♠:2♦

?

[TylerE]

3♠, IMO a wtp even for B/I.

[mtvesuvius]

3♠ wtp? Unfortunately this takes away bidding space, but that's why you play 2/1 :unsure:.

 

(Edit: Even playing 2/1, this is probably still worth a jump)

[P_Marlowe]

3S.

 

Describes the hand pretty well, and it generates a game

forcing seq.

 

One may or may not consider to make the bid even assuming

you did not have the king, but than bidding 3S is stretching it,

but not much, and it will simplify the later bidding.

 

One adv. is, that you dont need to assume, that 2D promised

another bid.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[gwnn]

apparently you need to jump rebid your suit in SAYC with 16-18 so 3♠.

 

in 2/1, a jump rebid is much more descriptive and I would be reluctant to use it.

[1eyedjack]

3♠ wtp? Unfortunately this takes away bidding space, but that's why you play 2/1 :unsure:.

 

(Edit: Even playing 2/1, this is probably still worth a jump)

Indeed, the measure of the bidding space consumed should be the amount of space consumed at the point that you have completed the description of your hand, not at the point of the first bid that you make in that process. That is why we open 1S rather than 1H with 5-5 in the majors. In isolation the 1S opener is higher ranking, and therefore superficially more expensive, than 1H, but by the time you have shown your 2 suits you expect to be lower. In this case, rebidding 2S, even if forcing, has the superficial appearance of conserving bidding space, but the subsequent bidding that you would be required to make in order to get the hand across would be higher than an immediate but more descriptive 3S rebid.

[neilkaz]

To me this is an ideal hand for a jump to 3♠. It is GF and for me, even in SAYC, this is the worst suit that I can hold. I also jump rebid in 2/1 and most definately this is the absolute worst suit that I can hold and others will require a better suit or hand.

 

The purpose of jumping to 3♠ in SAYC, IMHO, is to establish the 100% GF and also to flash the slam invite signal.

 

.. neilkaz ..

[Fluffy]

in 2/1 a jump to 3♠ is autofit, this suit is not worth it.

[kenberg]

The S in SAYC does not stand for Subtle or for Scientific.

 

 

Most likely the hand belongs in spades, and slam is obviously a possibility. In SAYC, you announce this fact with a jump in spades. In 2/1, I think I hold out for a better suit. If partner has a good hand I think 3S will tempt him to bid 6S with a stiff spade. That may not be good. But the question was about SAYC and there we (or I) ignore such subtleties.

[Benoit35]

strong jump?, I didnt

Let me guess, partner passed and you had a cold game?

 

If you rebid only 2♠, that indicates a minimum opening hand (12-14 hcp or so), so partner is justified to pass on, say, 10-11 hcp and no fit in sight.

[gwnn]

..., so partner is justified to pass on, say, 10-11 hcp and no fit in sight.

Wrong. A 2/1 promises a rebid in SAYC.

[jillybean]

Special treat for the forum vultures;

 

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sakq876ha72d72ck9&s=sj54h6dakjt3ca742]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

West North East South

 

 -     1♠    Pass  2♦

 Pass  2♠    Pass  4♠

 Pass  Pass  Pass  

[vuroth]

Actually, I kind of expected that.

 

How will you ever convince partner your hand is THAT GOOD after 2♠?

 

V

[P_Marlowe]

Special treat for the forum vultures;

 

Dealer: North Vul: None Scoring: IMP ♠ AKQ876 ♥ A72 ♦ 72 ♣ K9 ♠ J54 ♥ 6 ♦ AKJT3 ♣ A742  

 

West  North East  South

 

 -     1♠    Pass  2♦

 Pass  2♠    Pass  4♠

 Pass  Pass  Pass  

You could have survived 2S:

 

Your partner made a delayed game raise, i.e. he showed

a hand worth, which is worth around 13-15HCP, and given

your hand, you should move on over 4S.

 

Please keep in mind, that 2S did not show a 6 carder, hence

your partner showed primary support with 4S.

And your partner did not make a limit raise, so he has to be

stronger.

... Your partner has also a better bid available, 3S in the given

seq. is a mild slam invitation, and given his control rich hand he

should have made a move.

... Of course partner needs to be sure, that 3S wont be passed,

which may not be a clever assumption playing with a pickup

partner.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[mtvesuvius]

I agree with Uwe... Partner could have also splintered 4♥. 3♠ works so much better here, but even after 2♠ you can still recover somewhat.

[1eyedjack]

Well I have not been brought up on SAYC and I would not have read 1S-2D-2S-3S as forcing, let alone a slam try (2D not being GF).

I would have rebid 3C as responder, preparing to give Spade support next time. Trouble with that is opener, having failed to bid 3S last time around, has a bit of a problem with the third bid.

Indeed, playing 2/1 GF I would quite like to pattern out with responder's hand. Presumably North just bids a nebulous repeat of his Spades for a third time?

[Benoit35]

Yup, passing after 4♠ was the second mistake.

 

QUOTE (Benoit35 @ Jan 12 2009, 07:46 PM)

..., so partner is justified to pass on, say, 10-11 hcp and no fit in sight. 

 

 

Wrong. A 2/1 promises a rebid in SAYC.

Not if you play with me. With, say, ♠Qx ♥Jxx ♦ATxxx ♣Kxx there's hardly a game in sight and I'm happy to let partner play on a 5-2 fit. We might miss the odd 3NT but the risks outweigh the benefits.

[helene_t]

QUOTE (Benoit35 @ Jan 12 2009, 07:46 PM)

Wrong. A 2/1 promises a rebid in SAYC.

Not if you play with me.

Lol, you better not call your system "SAYC" then.

 

SAYC is not a fancy term for "generic 5-card majors". It is a very specific system.

 

And the 2♠ rebid is forcing. Maybe not in your system, but it is in SAYC.

[gwnn]

This is SAYC

 

http://web2.acbl.org/documentlibrary/play/...gle%20pages.pdf

[Apollo81]

Opener has a textbook SAYC 3♠ jump rebid, since this shows 16-18 with long spades.

In 2/1, opener would have a 2♠ rebid since the 3♠ would forcefully set the trump suit (opener's spades are not THAT good).

 

If opener makes the correct 3♠ rebid, it will be easy to get to 6♠. Getting to 7♠ will be more difficult with only the SAYC methods.

[Benoit35]

QUOTE (Benoit35 @ Jan 12 2009, 07:46 PM)

Wrong. A 2/1 promises a rebid in SAYC.

Not if you play with me.

Lol, you better not call your system "SAYC" then.

 

SAYC is not a fancy term for "generic 5-card majors". It is a very specific system.

 

And the 2♠ rebid is forcing. Maybe not in your system, but it is in SAYC.

This is what the SAYC Booklet says:

NOTE: Responder promises to bid again if he responded with a new suit at the two level unless opener’s rebid is at the game level. This applies when responder is an unpassed hand.

1♠ — 2♣

2♦ = forcing one round. Responder can limit his hand by bidding 2♠, 2NT, 3♣, or 3♥ at this point. He should not pass, since opener could have 18 points (just short of a jump shift rebid).

With the example and rationale given, it isn't 100% clear that this promise to rebid after a 2/1 applies when the opener's rebid is limited.

 

Don't get me wrong, I would nearly always bid a second time after an initial 2♦ response. But there may be the occasional situation when game is unlikely, and a further bid can send you crashing into an unmakeable 3NT. There are forcing bids and there are forcing bids; 2♠ being limited is of the second category, IMO.

[jdonn]

With the example and rationale given, it isn't 100% clear that this promise to rebid after a 2/1 applies when the opener's rebid is limited.

NOTE: Responder promises to bid again if he responded with a new suit at the two level unless opener’s rebid is at the game level.

I think we must have a difference of opinion about the meaning of one of the following:

 

Promises

100%

game level

rebid

 

:lol:

[kenberg]

Unless you have the most scientific tools available I doubt that you can confidently reach the grand. The hearts in the opening hand could be Ax, the diamonds xxx, and then you do not want to play for 13 tricks. I suppose responder might assume that 1S-2D-3S denies three diamonds but I think that is a little far-fetched.

 

Really, playing exactly SAYC so that 1S-2D-3S-4N is only standard blackwood I think it might go 1S-2D-3S-6S. You lack detailed scientific tools, you go with a general assessment of values.

 

After 1S-2D-2S, I might, as responder, try 3C, intending to correct a 3NT bid to 4S. This should show the stiff heart and three card spade support. It's probably not in SAYC but I wouldn't really call it a conventional agreement either. Responder had to have some reason for the sequence he chose, and three spades with a stiff heart sounds right.

[bid_em_up]

And the 2♠ rebid is forcing. Maybe not in your system, but it is in SAYC.

Helene, I don't mean to nitpick, but it is not the 2♠ bid that is forcing, opener has to make another call, he can't just pass the 2/1 response, but the fact that responder promises another bid with his 2/1 response to 1S.

 

There is a slight difference in the two.

[Wackojack]

Special treat for the forum vultures;

 

<!-- PARTNERSNS begin --><table border=1> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td>Dealer:</td> <td> North </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Vul:</td> <td> None </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Scoring:</td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table border='1'> <tr> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> AKQ876 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> A72 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> 72 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> K9 </td> </tr> </table> </th> </tr> <tr> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> J54 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> 6 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> AKJT3 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> A742 </td> </tr> </table> </th> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- PARTNERSNS end -->

 

West  North East  South

 

 -     1♠    Pass  2♦

 Pass  2♠    Pass  4♠

 Pass  Pass  Pass  

Standard methods should get you to:

1♠ 2♦

3♠ 4♣

4♥ 4NT RKC say 0314

5♣ 5♦ Q ask

6♣ ? yes + K♣

 

At this stage South can picture North to have:

♠ AKQxxx or better

♥ A(xxx)

♦ (xxx)

♣ K(xxx)

where some of the x's may be Q or not there. 12 tricks assured. 13 if North has Q♦ or 13 likely if North has ♦xx. Is there a way to find out? Possibly by bidding 6♦ which must be showing AK to a number of ♦s. North might now bid 7♠ holding the Q♦. With the doubleton actually held probably too much of a leap into the dark to bid 7♠. OTOH south might have gambled 7♠ on the basis that at the very worst the grand depends on the diamond finesse. Certainly if you were looking for a swing you could bid the grand