2NT over 1S Bid?

[DavidV52]

My partner and I are both rather new to modern bidding. We saw a bridge problem where S has a 13-point hand with good spades, and N has 12 points and both 4-card majors, with about equal honors in both majors. S opens 1S. As N, I would respond 3S, but the problem shows a 2NT response, without explanation. So I figure it must be commonly-understood, but I haven't seen it in the class I am taking.

 

Why would I bid 2NT, rather than 3S? What is my partner telling me, and why is 2NT a better bid than 3S? Thanks for your help.

[markyears]

I'm trying to answer even though I'm a novice myself. First I think 3S is not good, because the combined 25 points is enough for a game based on the modern theory.

 

I guess 2nt is Jacoby 2nt, which shows at least a game forcing strength and 4 cards support (some people use 3 cards support though).

 

My partner and I are both rather new to modern bidding. We saw a bridge problem where S has a 13-point hand with good spades, and N has 12 points and both 4-card majors, with about equal honors in both majors. S opens 1S. As N, I would respond 3S, but the problem shows a 2NT response, without explanation. So I figure it must be commonly-understood, but I haven't seen it in the class I am taking.

 

Why would I bid 2NT, rather than 3S? What is my partner telling me, and why is 2NT a better bid than 3S? Thanks for your help.

[masse24]

Hi David....Welcome to the forums! :D

 

2NT by responder after an opening 1 of Major is a conventional bid called Jacoby 2NT.

It is a Game Forcing bid in the Major suit opened and shows 4+ card support.

There are different response structures available but the most common is described very simply here:

Jacoby 2NT

[markyears]

Then I have a follow-up question now. I guess the 3S is called "limit-raise", which suggests an invitational hand and 3 cards or 4 cards support? I think 3 is enough based on what I learned. But many people don't agree, they said with only 3 cards support, I should start by a 2 over 1 with a minor.

 

Hi David....Welcome to the forums! :D

 

 

[the_clown]

Then I have a follow-up question now. I guess the 3S is called "limit-raise", which suggests an invitational hand and 3 cards or 4 cards support? I think 3 is enough based on what I learned. But many people don't agree, they said with only 3 cards support, I should start by a 2 over 1 with a minor.

 

Yes, it is pretty standard that 1♠-3♠ shows 4♠. If you have 3♠ and un invitational hand and 3card support, you bid 2 of a minor and then bid ♠ at the lowest level. It might be important for partner to know whether you have 3 or ♠s in order to make the right decision, e.g. to bid game or not, or to bid 3NT or 4♠

[DavidV52]

Thanks for the help! After reading the rersponses, I found some additional discussion of the Jacoby 2NT on p3 of the ACBL SAYC System Booklet (2006).

 

And thanks also for the welcome to the forums. It looks like a great learning resource. I hope to be able to contribute before too long!

[Antrax]

Yes, it is pretty standard that 1♠-3♠ shows 4♠. If you have 3♠ and un invitational hand and 3card support, you bid 2 of a minor and then bid ♠ at the lowest level. It might be important for partner to know whether you have 3 or ♠s in order to make the right decision, e.g. to bid game or not, or to bid 3NT or 4♠

I believe what's described is not "standard". At least in my partnership when we played "SAYC", sequences like 1♠-2♣, 2♠-3♠ or 1♠-2♣, 3♣-3♠ showed a hand with spade support and slam interest, not with a 3-card invitation to game. However, since there's no shortage of experts answering in these forums, it's probably best to wait for one of them to answer.

[Cyberyeti]

In the UK, some people me included play 1♠-2N as a value 4 card raise to 3 or better rather than the game forcing version played commonly in the States.

[fromageGB]

You haven't said what system you are learning, and of course that has an impact on the bid to use. Not only is it system dependent, it is partnership agreement where to draw the line between one bid and another.

 

While you would want to be in game opposite a 5 card major open (does it show 5 cards quaranteed?) when you have 12 HCP and 4 card support, it is not a good idea to bid 4♠ directly, as that may be done with a weaker distributional hand, and partner will therefore pass when there could be a possible slam with your 12. Equally, it is not a good idea to bid 3♠ as this can be passed.

 

You need a forcing bid, to be able to show your strength and your spades later. This could be a forcing 1NT if playing that method, but if not, then 2 of a minor (even though not a good natural suit) is commonly used, as it is forcing. I play an immediate 2NT as 4 card support game force, but for me (and others) 12 HCP is normally insufficient as our base is 13, which then makes slam investigation more secure. We have another bid for an 11/12 count. I would suggest you ask your teacher what he would recommend.

[daveharty]

There is nothing "wrong" with bidding 3S with North's hand in your problem, as long as South understands what is meant by the bid. A lot of people seem to think you should automatically force to game with a 12-count opposite a 1M opener, but if your agreement is that it shows 10-12 points and 4 trumps, then go ahead and make your system bid. Partner will (should) bid the fourth with a full sound opener.

 

That being said, it's not such a common agreement any more; it's more common to use 1M-3M as a WEAK bid. There is an emphasis in modern bidding to put immediate pressure on the opponents when you have a weak hand with a fit for partner by jumping immediately to the level to which you are willing to compete; so jump raises of partner's suit are usually used as preemptive fit-showing bids, rather than value based fit-showing bids. This leaves you with a need for a bid that immediately forces to game while establishing a fit, and 2NT is most commonly used for that (at least here in ACBL-land). This also allows for additional descriptive bidding below the game level (as opposed to after 1M-3M) in case a slam investigation is warranted. For example, after the old standard auction 1S-3S-4S, responder, even holding extra values, might be awkwardly placed to bid above game not knowing much about opener's hand other than that they failed to make a control bid; if responder had been able to bid 2NT rather than 3S, extra information might have been exchanged. Also, when playing J2NT, people use a variety of bids to show 4-card raises of other strengths (i.e. Bergen raises, or several other options). I would have to see the hand in question before I could say whether it was a game-forcing hand or an invitational hand, but as you can probably gather from what I wrote before, I don't view a 12-point hand as an automatic GF raise.

 

Of course nothing is free; playing Jacoby 2NT, you give up the old standard "balanced game force" meaning for 2NT, which is significant in some people's eyes. Various ways to deal with THAT have been devised, like having 1M-2C be "either a natural club 2/1 OR a balanced 13-15", etc. It also affects what a jump shift shows. A good example of how adding a convention can have far-reaching effects on the rest of one's bidding system.