Making a 2/1 with 4 card major support

[broze]

My current style is to never make 2/1 GF bids with 4 cards in my partner's Major - I will always go through Jacoby 2NT or a splinter, and no I do not play fit jumps. However our convention card also has "picture jumps" written on it simply because fast arrival with weak hands makes little sense - then again picture jumps haven't come up yet.

 

I have recently seen two or three missed slams while kibitzing players of very good standard in PJ auctions or where a player made a 2/1 with 4 card support.

 

Here is the most recent mishap from a Jec match, West deals:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sjhkt7djt6cqt9762&w=sa8643ha53d7cak53&n=s952hqj962dk543c4&e=skqt7h84daq982cj8]399|300[/hv]

 

Jec's teammates found the slam after a Jacoby sequence. In the other room slam was missed after 1♠-2♦-3♣-4♠ (the picture bid - clearly a perfect hand for it) and it's difficult to assign blame. So what went wrong?

 

So some questions: Does it make sense to play Picture jumps if you never make a 2/1 with 4 card Major support (do you ever do that)? On the other hand would you ever make a picture jump with only 3 card support?

[mikeh]

I am a strong believer in showing a good 5 card suit in a 2/1 context, even with 4 (or 5!) trumps. Bridge is not always about seizing control of auctions, altho many players find it easier than bidding cooperatively. I like partner to be able to look at, say, xxx and realize this isn't good and conversely to look at Kx or Qx and realize that this is very good.

 

As for the example, I blame West entirely. He is looking at 7 controls!!!! Opposite as little as Kxxx xx Axxxx xx, slam has play, and partner has MORE than that! West was counting points, not valuing his hand, when he passed 4♠, imo.

[cherdano]

West has the perfect hand to bid keycard and sign off in 5♠ in case one keycard is missing. (Catering for KQJx xx KQJxx xx.)

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Sure, West has a big control hand, but East can never convince partner that he holds 4 card support after a 2/1 .

 

EDIT: Actually, Ken-Rexford, an advocate of 2/1 with support, may just have a system to show 4 card support after a 2/1 GF .

Edited March 7, 2013 by TWO4BRIDGE

[mikeh]

Sure, West has a big control hand, but East can never convince partner that he holds 4 card support after a 2/1 .

 

EDIT: Actually, Ken-Rexford, an advocate of 2/1 with support, may just have a system to show 4 card support after a 2/1 GF .

why not?

 

Seriously, this is only a problem if you define a 2/1 as denying 4 card support. In other words, you are saying that because you never 2/1 with 4 card support, partner will never play you for 4 card support. Ever hear of a tautology?

 

I would probably J2N with the responding hand, partly because I usually play a fairly good J2N method, and partly because the diamond suit is just a touch too weak for me. But it's close, and I see zero reason for missing slam.

 

I wouldn't make a picture bid. I understand the idea, and indeed one can agree that a jump to 4♠ promises 4 card support and no controls in the side suits. Btw, if one has that agreement, the 4♠ bid announces 4 card support, so it ought to be fairly easy to convince partner.

 

If I were to bid 2♦, I'd bid 3♠ in response to 3♣. This is a mild slam try, warranted by the excellent support and the knowledge that for me and for most 2/1 players 3♣ showed significant extras. I don't need 3♠ as a mere preference since I have a stalling 3♥ available for hands that can't be bid otherwise.

 

Wild horses wouldn't keep me out of slam as West thereafter.

 

One doesn't need a lot of artificiality. One merely needs to learn how to hold a conversation by way of the bidding: how to describe your hand and how to listen to and understand partner's bidding.

[Vampyr]

This is a mild slam try, warranted by the excellent support and the knowledge that for me and for most 2/1 players 3♣ showed significant extras.

 

Not familiar with 2/1 GF... I should have thought that if you are already forced to game you can show your shape without promising extra values. Is this wrong?

[mikeh]

Not familiar with 2/1 GF... I should have thought that if you are already forced to game you can show your shape without promising extra values. Is this wrong?

There are 2 schools of thought. I think it fair to say that the majority say otherwise. The reason is that after a 3 level rebid by opener, such as 3♣ in the OP, responder often has to make a decision about 3N. If opener can have a 12 count then it is unsafe to drive beyond 3N with a potentially or actually misfitting 15-17 count, while if partner is known to have 15 or so, then it is far safer.

 

This is by no means unanimous and I gather some good players disagree.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

There are 2 schools of thought. I think it fair to say that the majority say otherwise. The reason is that after a 3 level rebid by opener, such as 3♣ in the OP, responder often has to make a decision about 3N. If opener can have a 12 count then it is unsafe to drive beyond 3N with a potentially or actually misfitting 15-17 count, while if partner is known to have 15 or so, then it is far safer.

 

This is by no means unanimous and I gather some good players disagree.

Mikeh:

What about Serious-/non-Serious-3NT ??

 

Isn't it so much clearer ( ie. 3NT is never "to play" ) with an immediate show of 4 card support ?

[mike777]

fwiw

 

nonseriours/serious 3nt seems a ......grossly undefined for lack of a better

[kenrexford]

Agree 100% with Mike's comment about the assumption of no 4-fit being a self-fulfilling but unnecessary prophesy.

 

I also, however, define picture jumps even more tightly, because this is an awkward auction for the obvious reason. That said, I would bid the exact same way if East also has the diamond Jack, which is not all that important of a card. Additionally, even double dummy I am not THAT excited about this slam, as it needs a lot of work. If I could have either partner show the other his exact hand, I would still not be sure whether the slam should be bid or not quickly. So, whatever the methods, this seems like a guess hand. I mean, if Opener has a response to Jacoby 2NT that shows this EXACT hand, should East bid slam? Not exactly sure. I would have to run some odds on 2-2 splits and 3-1 splits but finesses working and ruff options and the like. I think it is percentage, but not 100% sure.

[fromageGB]

What about Serious-/non-Serious-3NT ??

Isn't it so much clearer ( ie. 3NT is never "to play" ) with an immediate show of 4 card support ?

1♠ 2♦ 3♣ 3NT being non-serious? Are you being serious?

[fromageGB]

Not familiar with 2/1 GF... I should have thought that if you are already forced to game you can show your shape without promising extra values. Is this wrong?

And it's more than safety.

(1) If opener has described or denied strength by his first rebid it helps responder make a slam seeking decision.

(2) If opener rebids just 2♠ on a weaker hand with perhaps only 5 cards, responder can bid 2NT forcing as a relay to discover opener's shape, so both strength and shape can be shown with this treatment.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

1♠ 2♦ 3♣ 3NT being non-serious? Are you being serious?

Where is your Major suit agreement in your example ?

[TWO4BRIDGE]

I just looked at a few old threads where:

1M - 2C! ( clubs and/or 3+ ♥ support )

 

Ron ( the hog ) calls 2D! or 2C! for this hand as "from the planet Bizarro "

[fromageGB]

Where is your Major suit agreement in your example ?

Not my example, yours. Mikeh was talking about it being unsafe to drive beyond 3NT in the sequence 1♠ 2♦ 3♣, and you seem to be suggesting that 3NT should be non-serious here. Hence my comment. :P

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Not my example, yours. Mikeh was talking about it being unsafe to drive beyond 3NT in the sequence 1♠ 2♦ 3♣, and you seem to be suggesting that 3NT should be non-serious here. Hence my comment. :P

That sequence [ 1♠-2♦, 3♣ ] is just another example of the trouble

you can get into when not showing an immediate 4 card ♠ support .

And 2D is even more bizarro than a 2C ( 2/1 GF ) .

 

Sure, regular Jacoby2NT has it's drawbacks but there are modified versions to use.

 

My question alluded to the continuation of the above sequence:

1♠ - 2♦!

3♣ - 3♠ ... is Serious/non-Serious 3NT ON or off ??

[aguahombre]

My question alluded to the continuation of the above sequence:

1♠ - 2♦!

3♣ - 3♠ ... is Serious/non-Serious 3NT ON or off ??

IMO, 3♣ should already have been serious, and 3NT would merely be pattern ---even passable.

[fromageGB]

OTOH, if you are playing non-serious you are likely to have an agreement that 3NT is never to play. I am also in the camp that thinks a 3♣ bid needs a 15 count (typically), and would take 3NT over 3♠ to be non-serious : opener is just 15 or 16, over to you, partner.

 

When partner is unlimited, 3NT after explicit spade agreement is always non-serious for me, and having already made a bid of 3♣ showing an expected 15, 4any would be a serious cue bid (of whatever style) with say 17+.