I’m Convinced – It’s Time to Dump Jacoby 2NT

[jogs]

Dump both J2NT and Bergen raises. Play fit showing jumps both in contested and uncontested auctions.

 

1♥ - 3♣

 

3♣ is fit showing, 5+ clubs and 4 hearts. Then maybe the partnership would be able to count the 12 tricks.

[jdeegan]

Nobody seems to have read this important historical note. It's not clear to me how Oswald Jacoby came in to the story, but it sounds like Jacoby 2NT should probably be called Jdeegan 2NT. Let's all agree to use this new name, I don't want to see any more threads titled "It's time to Dump Jacoby".

 

It is time to dump JDeegan 2NT. Who can deny it? There are so many better uses for the 2NT bid. One of my faves is to make it a limit raise or better.

[rsteele]

From the feedback in this thread “Jacoby 2NT” http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/51099-jacoby-2nt/ , kenrexford, whereagles and TWO4BRIDGE all advise to steer clear of Jacoby 2NT. When this hand occurred I was looking for ways on how to find the slam using Jacoby 2NT with a combined 28 HCP count in a natural 2/1 system. Unable to find the slam using Jacoby, I am now convinced that kenrexford, whereagles and TWO4BRIDGE are all correct. It’s time to dump Jacoby 2NT!

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s64hakjt9dj64cak5&n=sa8hq862da3cqj962]133|200[/hv]

 

Trying the different methods suggested in the above thread, I came up with this:

 

Method 1: SAYC Booklet

• 3 of a side suit = singleton

• 4 of a side suit = good 5-card suit

• 4 of trumps = minimum (11-14 HCP), no shortness

• 3NT = medium (15-17), no shortness

• 3 of trumps = maximum (18+), no shortness

 

OPENER...RESPONDER

1H............2NT

3NT...........?

 

How would the auction continue? Neither partner knows about the ♣ fit, a place for declarer to dump losers on.

 

Method 2: Suggested by Roger Clee

• 1M - 2NT

• 3♣: Min, 3♦ asks

• 3♦: Extras, shortness, 3♥ asks

• 3♥: Extras, 5422, 3♠ asks

• 3♠: Extras, 6+ no shortness (3NT non-serious over this)

• 3NT: 18-19 bal

• 4 lower: 5-5, extras

• 4M: Min, 6+ no shortness, good for slam

 

1H............2NT

3C............?

 

After a minimum response, responder will most likely signoff in 4♥. Again, the ♣ fit is not discovered.

 

Method 3: Suggested by gwnn

• 3♣ minimum (i.e. less than an ace above a minimum, now 3♦ asks and we have the same structure except 4M shows a 5332/5422)

• 3♦ non minimum, no shortness

• 3♥ short clubs

• 3♠ short diamonds

• 3NT short other major

• 4x=5-5

• 4M min, 6M, no shortness.

 

1H............2NT

3C............?

 

Same result as method 2. Again, the ♣ fit is not discovered.

 

Method 4: Suggested by Zelandakh

 

• 3♣ = min with shortage (3♦ asks, 3♥ forces cues + frivolous, new suit natural)

• 3♦ = mid with shortage (3♥ asks, 3♠ forces cues, 3NT spades, 4m natural)

• 3♥ = min without shortage (frivolous and cues)

• 3♠ = mid without shortage (cues)

• 3NT/4m = max (you can choose between cues or shortage-showing bids here, cues are probably better as these hands can effectively take control)

 

1H..................2NT

3S..................4D (cue)

4S(Kickback)..5H (2 with the queen)

?

 

With 2 ♦ losers (1 taken care of with the Ace) and 1 ♠ loser, opener must gamble on bidding the slam. The gamble works here because of the ♣ fit. However, I don’t believe that top flight players take these sort of gambles. Should the gamble fail, you have cost your side plenty of IMPS.

 

Method 5: Bog standard 2/1 as suggested by Vampyr

• Or you can just do it the old-fashioned way and bid 2/1 followed by a "delayed game raise".

 

1H............2C (2/1 GF)

3C (fit)......3H (double fit, ♥ and ♣)

4NT (6-card Blackwood)

 

With bog standard 2/1 the ♣ fit is found and now the slam can be safely bid.

[rsteele]

Try 1H - 2NT (Jacoby)

3H - 3S (cue bids follow)

4C - 4D

5C - responder count now count 12 tricks. 5 hearts, 5 clubs and two side aces. Why is this hand a Jacoby problem?

[fromageGB]

While on this hand I would prefer a 2♣ 2 over 1 response, I have no trouble with J2N either. The key point is that South has to show extra strength, and North checks for aces. If your methods don't allow extra strength to be shown, then it is not so easy. For example, in my methods we use non-serious 3NT. (When hearts are trumps, spades takes the place of NT.)

 

1♥ ... 2♠ (4 card support, 13+ hcp, ie Jacoby )

2NT (no shortage, how about you?)

... 3♠ (no shortage either. Non-serious, ie no significant extra strength)

4♣ (serious cue bid, very good hand for the hcp. More like a 17/18 than a 16, with those aces and kings)

... 4♦ control

4♥ (OK, said my bit. Pass if you like, I can't go further.)

... 4♠ (Ace ask. The doubletons may provide ruffs, clubs may be set up, I have the top spade.)

4NT (1 KC, or 3 without)

... 5♣ (Formality, really, given the strength, but which?)

6♣ (3, and this is my cheapest king (ie denying ♠K))

... 6♥ (12 tricks visible, 13 if opener has 6 hearts, but can't find out, and anyway a possibility that one of the clubs may need to be ruffed on a very bad break)

... (If opener had bid 5♠ with the ♠K, I'd bid 6♣ to ask about that one, with 13 tricks in the bag if it's there, and 6♥ on the club finesse if not. Or safe 6 without a diamond lead.)