Sim Request

[eagles123]

[hv=pc=n&n=sq953hak53da53caj&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1sp2n(Jacoby)p4s(minimum)]133|200[/hv]

 

would anyone be able to run a sim to see how often game/slam/grand makes here?

 

minimum must be 5 spades as otherwise would open a weak NT, I guess 5-6 spades and 9-13 points would be a realistic criteria?

 

Thanks,

 

Eagles

[PhilKing]

minimum must be 5 spades as otherwise would open a weak NT, I guess 5-6 spades and 9-13 points would be a realistic criteria?

 

Thanks,

 

Eagles

 

That's not reasonable - pard should never jump to 4M with shape or an extra trump. 4M should be reserved for 5332 minimums with poor controls.

 

You need to rethink the structure.

[1eyedjack]

I expect that you would also want to split up the "game" frequency hands between those making 10 tricks v those making 11, given that it costs nothing to investigate slam and bail out in game provided that you make 11, but very obviously costs if 10 is the limit.

 

 

[PhilKing]

it costs nothing to investigate slam and bail out in game provided that you make 11.

 

This statement is "true" provided the partnership makes the correct decision 100% of the time after flapping about at the five level.

[eagles123]

ok ok I can see the topic was wrong, i'll post the hands then

 

[hv=pc=n&s=skjt872hjdq8ckt87&n=sq953hak53da53caj]133|200[/hv]

 

is South right to treat the hand as a minimum? should north bid over 4S?

 

Cheers

 

Eagles

[Zelandakh]

Playing regular Jacoby, the jump to 4 denies a side shortage and the given South hand would rebid 3♥. Also, many would consider this a 2♠ opening - that is just a matter of style though.

[Cyberyeti]

That's not reasonable - pard should never jump to 4M with shape or an extra trump. 4M should be reserved for 5332 minimums with poor controls.

 

You need to rethink the structure.

 

And what if you open 1N on those (I know the OP implies he might not).

[Zelandakh]

And what if you open 1N on those (I know the OP implies he might not).

In regular Jacoby, a minimum 5422 would qualify in that case. You might also consider investing in a better rebid structure.

[PhilKing]

And what if you open 1N on those (I know the OP implies he might not).

 

Then I would suggest playing 4M as showing specifically the ♦432.

[CamHenry]

ok ok I can see the topic was wrong, i'll post the hands then

 

[hv=pc=n&s=skjt872hjdq8ckt87&n=sq953hak53da53caj]133|200[/hv]

 

is South right to treat the hand as a minimum? should north bid over 4S?

 

Cheers

 

Eagles

 

I think S should consider what N could have. Even given the worst possible hand opposite, something like xxxx/KQxx/AK/Qxx, game has very good play despite significant wasted values. N will be able to judge whether to go on based on S's shape - so South should describe his hand. Suppose we rearrange this minimum hand a bit: Axxx/xxxx/Ax/Axx and there's still some play for slam.

[Cyberyeti]

I think S should consider what N could have. Even given the worst possible hand opposite, something like xxxx/KQxx/AK/Qxx, game has very good play despite significant wasted values. N will be able to judge whether to go on based on S's shape - so South should describe his hand. Suppose we rearrange this minimum hand a bit: Axxx/xxxx/Ax/Axx and there's still some play for slam.

 

The worst hand partner can have is the one he thinks is useful but actually isn't and means you go off in 5 or 6 if you encourage him. You basically have a weak 2 here (for a minute ignore the red suit honours, they're probably not that useful) as the guts of your hand. I would bid 4♠ over 2N with this hand, but my 2N is not GF and this shows a lowish pointcount hand with 6 spades for us, I'm not sure what standard Jacoby does.

 

I entirely understand bidding 4♠ on what is basically a working aceless 7 count, but you can't do that if partner is not going to bid on with the other hand, ♠Kxxxxx, ♣Kxxx is all he needs for a slam. It looks to me like 2 players with different styles, that just need to agree what this bid means.

[aguahombre]

Agree with PK that if you use J2N as a G.F. Major raise, you should employ better methods. However, especially with weak NT in play, I don't think it should matter much to North with that hand. I would be going on this: "If she thinks she has a 1♠ opener (not a NT, not a weak two, not a pass), then I think slam is making." Set trumps, then Wood, then sign off in 6.

[1eyedjack]

It is a huge waste of bidding space to require opener to rebid 4S on all minimum hands, and to use all of the bids from 3C up to 4H inclusive to show various hand types with extras. The so called principle of fast arrival is significantly flawed where partner is unlimited and may yet quite easily have slam ambitions even opposite the right minimum.

 

If you felt the need to have just one bid reserved for all minimum rebids, I suggest that it would be better if that were the first step (3♣ in this case), with all other bids showing extras (progressively more narrowly defined the more room is removed). Not saying that even THAT is optimal; just saying that it is not hard to see how that would be an improvement over using 4♠ for that purpose.

 

If there were no prospect of slam being good opposite a minimum, then that would be a different matter.

 

In other news, I recall that in one of the more recent announcements of upgrades to GIB's bidding they said that GIB had introduced fast arrival into its armory. I had some cold sweats at the time wondering whether it was going to apply this principle willy nilly in unlimited auctions, and I haven't yet had a chance to notice. I expect that its Jacoby response structure is bespoke anyway, and probably not dissimilar to the OP. Will have to check that out presently.

 

Not really a N/B subject, I know.