A Reply to Jacoby 2NT -- a 'Stop Here' bid?

[leebca]

First post to this Forum.

 

So in National Tournament play in Las Vegas, my partner, sometimes known for opening light (in any seat), opens in second seat with 1 Spade. I respond 2NT (my partner Alerts and explains to the inquiry that it is Jacoby 2NT).

 

Opposition passes throughout auction.

 

My partner then responds, "4 Spades." I took it as a 'stop here' signal. I expected a more or less common response of showing a singleton or void at the 3 level or a particularly long side suit at the 4 level. I stopped bidding. It makes 7 Spades. My partner was a bit put out saying I should have continued on with the bidding to explore slam possibilities.

 

I did have a hand that would definitely warrant exploring a slam:

Qxxx Spades

Heart void

Kx diamond

AKQxxxx of clubs

 

Partner did in fact have a full opening hand, 5 spades AK, and the Jx of clubs, with the A of diamonds and 4 hearts of (I forgot) what value to give her 14 HCPs. No singleton or void, no real good outside suit.

 

I would have thought a better/best response to my 2NT to be "3 spades." With this response, I'd explore slam by queue bidding 4C, maybe then her bid of 4D, then 4NT [1430] (or 4H) by me, etc.

 

How would you take the "4 spade" rebid by your partner? What would you have done after the 4 Spade bid?

 

 

Thanks

LEE

[PhilKing]

I doubt many players would have the imagination to pass 4♠, but you are theoretically correct - partner could have ♠JTxxx ♥AKJ ♦QJx ♣xx.

 

That's the kind of hand partner should have. Some go further and say partner is barred from having an ace and a king (so ♠JTxxx ♥AQJ ♦QJx ♣Jx). There is an argument that suggests you are just being too pessimistic, but partner has told you they have a terrible hand for slam, so you have to trust them. Even if partner had only 11 points, a jump to game is just not on holding AAK.

 

After 2NT, the auction should go 3♠-4♣-4♦-5NT(GSF)-7♠.

[leebca]

I sat long enough thinking to make the opponents get a bit peeved at my hesitation, but I chose to pass. Much regrets on that. I still remember the bidding and my holding on the hand (now played 16 days ago).

 

Thanks for your comment.

[hrothgar]

Personally, I hate both the pass over 4♠ and the 2NT response.

Give partner five spades to the AK and nothing else and you are cold for 6♣

[Bbradley62]

I disagree with Phil and agree with Hrothgar, except that I might prefer to be in 6♠ there than 6♣, depending on form of scoring.

 

If you want to give your partner something better than "people said", you might want to use an ACBL-published pamphlet that discusses the conventions played in conjunction with SAYC. Even if you're playing 2/1 instead of SAYC, the descriptions of the "named" conventions can be helpful. You might want to check this out on the ACBL website.

 

Page 3 of the ACBL SAYC pamphlet explains Jacoby 2NT. There are three responses available to partner over 2NT to show a hand with no shortness:

• 4S = minimum
  
• 3N = medium
  
• 3S = maximum

The pamphlet says "medium" is 15-17HCP, with fewer being "minimum" and more being "maximum". Of course, you can agree to something different with your partner. It's my understanding that the most common definition of "medium" is 14-16HCP. I'm sure there are many different agreements for these ranges, but 14 is pretty unlikely to qualify as maximum.

[leebca]

Don't wish to be critical to anyone -- first time posting here. However, the point is in my post -- the question asked.

 

Another agreement or another convention may be better or best, but it was not possible at the time. At the time of play I have to play our agreement. ;)

 

PhilKing has pointed out what, at the time, could well be my partner's holdings. A 6 ♣ contract could be a mistake if partner doesn't own the ♠AK and even if so, the outstanding spades are stacked four to the J. Besides, hard to switch to a ♣ contract when the ♠ fit is clear from the start. I'd be left having to explain why I took the contract away from an established 5+/4 fit if it went down. An off-side ♦A and four to the J♣ would be one of a few bad possibles.

 

I reasoned at the time that the 4♠ bid was a minimum hand, although in my partner's case, that could be 11 or 12 HCPs.

 

Nonetheless, it stands as a bottom board. 6♠ would be in line with all others except one who bid and made 7♠.

 

I do appreciate all input/replies. More comments are still welcomed. Thanks all.

[gszes]

jacoby 2n is an excellent overall convention but it is generally best used when responder

has a relatively balanced hand mainly because of the jump to game feature with a minimum.

You had 2 other avenues open to you a 2c bid to start the festivities (especially effective

when playing 2/1) and if that is not reasonable you can always try a 4h splinter (unless that

is also impossible). Assuming neither of those routes is available you still could cue bid 5c

and see if that gets a 5d cue from partner you can then follow with 5h and if p still tries

to sign off (surely they would not with spade AK) you can then give up. Even with the most

ridiculous hand p might have 4s should be safe so the 5 level rates to be pretty safe for slam

exploration purposes.

[Bbradley62]

Another agreement or another convention may be better or best, but it was not possible at the time. At the time of play I have to play our agreement. ;)

And, what is "[y]our agreement"? If your agreement is simply to play Jacoby 2NT, without having made any adjustments to the convention as it is written, it is completely unreasonable to expect partner to rebid 3♠ with a 14 count. To specifically address your questions...

 

How would you take the "4 spade" rebid by your partner? What would you have done after the 4 Spade bid?

As I pointed out above, ACBL, in its published literature, says that you should take the 4♠ rebid as 11-14HCP, 5spades and no singleton or void. However, I think the vast majority of players would take it as 11-13, same shape. It seems to me that some action is required over 4♠, probably cuebidding 5♣. When pard cuebids 5♦ in response, you're pretty darn happy...

[leebca]

gszes,

 

Neither conventions/tools are used by us. Unless I'm mis-understanding your suggestion. . .My partner, with the hand held, would pass my 5♣ thinking I bid game on my own, without any knowledge of a spade fit, only believing he had an opening hand and 5+ spades. Holding two clubs, my partner would proudly have put dummy down. We generally agree that the faster/higher we bid, the less we have.

 

The Jacoby 2NT seemed to me at the time the lesser of the evils -- two out of three requirements, a fit immediately agreed to, and conveying at least opening values. It seemed to me to be a springboard towards slam investigations with the conventions we utilize. It ran through my brain, albeit briefly, that all other bids by me and then by partner would likely miss a potential slam, with our conventions.

 

Bbradley62,

 

A 3NT rebid by partner would have worked, I think, but it would be a stretch for this partner having two doubletons, even though the hand might be considered medium. I would have bid pass 3NT for sure and we would go on to slam.

 

5♠ would be unlikely to make (from my perspective) with partner having 11-12 HCP (e.g., missing the ♠K). I couldn't muster bidding past the 4♠ facing the minimum: an 11-12 HCP hand with a 5-card spade suit. I appreciate your opinion that I should have bid on, though. That's the reply to the question.

[Mbodell]

I think playing "normalish" J2nt it makes sense to think of 4♠ as min, 3nt as med, 3♠ as max. But unlike a lot of other places, I wouldn't keep those the usual equal size ranges that you use in other contexts. Rather, I'd re-evaluate for slam. 4♠ is a terrible hand for slam much worse than what you'd think of as an opening hand. Something with lots of outside Q and J and barely an opening hand. Axxxx Qxx QJ QJx is a 12 count, but is awful for slam. So 4♠ is 11-ish to a very slam bad 14. 3nt is a decent 13 to an average 16 or slam poor 17. 3♠ is a good 16 or greater. AKxxxx Kx Kxx Kx is a reasonable 3♠ call. AKxxx KJ QJx QJx is one point higher at 17 but would probably only be a 3nt call for me. Your partner had AKxxx Qxxx Ax Jx. For me, that is a 3nt call. The Q and J are not great slam values (although the Q being in a 4 card suit is a bit better), but the 3 keycards are clearly not a minimum. I think 2 key cards and the Q is probably too much for a 4♠ slam negative hand, 3 key cards is definitely too much.

 

Your hand though should bid even over the terrible hands that have 4♠. Since it is more likely you'll have slam than go down at the 5 level, IMO. Even if partner has something like the worst possible heart holding of KQJ for 6 near wasted points (maybe there is a ruffing finesse, so not totally wasted, but still) he still needs about 6 points elsewhere. There is only 1 available in clubs. So in the worst case scenario partner still has 5 hcp in spades and diamonds. the K of spades and Q of diamonds is enough that you are more likely than not to make 5 spades, and that was pretty much the worst possible hand for partner. Give partner a bad 10 hcp 4♠ call like Axxxx QJx Qxx Jx and you are still more likely to make 5 than go down, and that is only a 10 count. AKxxxx Qxx Qx Jx is a 12 count with some wasted values that probably gives a bad answer, and there you are still cold for 6 - barring an opening opponent ruff. Unfortunately, you can't key card because you will not know if the heart A is one of the keycards. But you can bid 5♣ hoping to hear 5♦ (over which you can force to small slam and maybe even bid 5♥ and then 6♣ looking for 7). If you hear 5♥, just bid 5♠, since a minimum slam poor hand with something in hearts and not diamonds is less likely to make slam. If you hear 5♠ over 5♣ I'd be tempted to raise to 6 spades. If partner can't cue either red suit, they are like 90% likely to have the AK of spades. That should be enough more often than not, although you might need to survive a diamond lead through the Kx (but you might get a heart or trump or club lead and be able to pull trump and pitch on clubs. You might get the diamond A lead or have it be onside too).

[mikestar13]

How do you play 1♠-3♣? If it is a strong jump shift, this is the best way to start. A strong jumps shift shows a good 5 card or longer club suit with significantly more than minimum game forcing values. It may or may not have spade support, if so, you can show it on the next round. If 3♣ has a different agreed meaning (or no agreed meaning) you must choose another bid and 2NT is one reasonable possibility when no available bid is right--it at least shows good spade support and game value or better. It then comes down to realizing that your cards are so extremely much better than they might be that you should risk the five level in spite of partner's 4♠ bid showing a minimum with no shortness. The art of hand evaluation takes some study, and you are asking the right questions. Welcome to the forums!

[lycier]

Biggest problem of Jacoby 2NT is 4M to show min, you lose all the bidding room if responder is strong.

So it need to use some modified Jacoby 2nt so as to avoid many disaster.

[whereagles]

jacoby 2n is an excellent overall convention but it is generally best used when responder has a relatively balanced hand mainly because of the jump to game feature with a minimum.

 

The idea of J2NT is sound. Standard follow-ups are however quite misguided and generally end up royally sucking. [Which is why I had to invent my own version of it. Martel's is also good, but too rare.]

[whereagles]

Biggest problem of Jacoby 2NT is 4M to show min, you lose all the bidding room if responder is strong.

So it need to use some modified Jacoby 2nt so as to avoid many disaster.

 

Precisely. One of the solutions is to set a ceiling for responder, so that he can pass 4M without discomfort.

[Zelandakh]

A very common theme for posts on BBF is whether to make a GF raise or start by showing a good side suit on hands with both features. Here I think you would see very few votes for a J2NT response if only given Responder's hand as a bidding problem. This is by far the clearest mistake in the auction imho.

 

Of course Opener's 4♠ also controbuted. Even if you are going strictly by the SAYC booklet this 5 control hand is obviously worth an upgrade into 3NT. It shows a lack of understanding of the auction to woodenly bid 4♠ here imo. And did you really mean that partner would pass 5♣ in the auction 1♠ - 2NT; 4♠ - 5♣? That would seem a very eccentric decision.

 

Another final option that has not been given yet (where are you WE?) would be to splinter in hearts and then ask for key cards over a sign off. Some play this sequence as Exclusion with a heart void and this would enable you to find out about the important cards ♠AK, ♦A immediately without getting overboard.

 

In any case, the solution is to sit down with your partner and work out the ranges you want to work with. My suggestion would be to keep the 4♠ rebid very tightly defined and therefore include more in 3♠ and 3NT. Or use a completely different structure altogether, although if you do do that remember not to describe it as J2NT any more! Most of all though, understand that sometimes showing the support immediately is not the best option in a natural system.

[hrothgar]

In any case, the solution is to sit down with your partner and work out the ranges you want to work with. My suggestion would be to keep the 4♠ rebid very tightly defined and therefore include more in 3♠ and 3NT.

 

Since the conversation is already drifting, "fast arrival" - using an immediate 4♠ response to show a minimum hand - is an atrocious use of bidding space. Picture bidding or some kind of reasonable response structure is going to yield much better results. I realize that you are constrained by the system that you have, not the one that you wish you have. However, to me this is all the more reason to eschew the original 2NT response in favor of either a strong jump shift or a 2/1.

[leebca]

Thank you all.

 

Zelandakh,

 

I read the proposal as 1♠, 5♣. This is what I thought gszes meant. Me bidding on after 4♠ is the question. My partner would continue bidding after the Jacoby 2NT if I took it to 5♣. Re-reading that post, it seems I misunderstood.

[neilkaz]

 

Page 3 of the ACBL SAYC pamphlet explains Jacoby 2NT. There are three responses available to partner over 2NT to show a hand with no shortness:

• 4S = minimum
  
• 3N = medium
  
• 3S = maximum

The pamphlet says "medium" is 15-17HCP, with fewer being "minimum" and more being "maximum". Of course, you can agree to something different with your partner. It's my understanding that the most common definition of "medium" is 14-16HCP. I'm sure there are many different agreements for these ranges, but 14 is pretty unlikely to qualify as maximum.

 

Herein lies some of the problem; the wooden use of HCP count to determine range! Bidding and bidding experience has improved since the first ACBL-wide SAYC game about 25 years ago (I played in it). Better to lower the requirements for 3NT somewhat as so many disasters have occurred when responder actions after a direct 4♠ haven't worked out. Here with 14 HCP and 3 key cards opener has too much to rebid 4♠.

 

Many of you here are in the ACBL so I'll refer you to the series on slam bidding by Bergen. Starting about Jan this year, there are several columns on J2NT. In one he gives opener an aces and spaces 12 count, but with 3 aces and 6 trump headed by the 9. He states that with 3 aces and an extra trump opener has too much to bid 4♠ and I agree with him.

 

As for the OP hand, my gosh it has a likely 7♣ tricks, a void, Qxxx in trumps and a side king. It is hard to imagine a hand even opening a light 1♠ that isn't cold for 5♠ or more. Therefore, responder was quite cowardly in not moving over 4♠ with a 5♣ cue bid.

 

Bridge is a game of odds and percentages and of course it is possible to find opener with the wrong hand here after making a slam move, but to me, it is far more likely to result in a good slam, than 5♠-1.

 

I give 15% of the blame to opener for being a slave to the HCP count, and 85% to responder for being far too cautious.

 

Now I have a question to opening theorists. Why were the original basic responses to this convention designed to have the higher rebid (3NT) be weaker than the lower rebid 3♠? Of course, 3♠ allows responder to say something about his hand with 3NT. Perhaps that is the purpose?

 

.. neilkaz ..

[leebca]

I thought well 'spoke' neilkaz. I think your assessment the best. Like a deer in the headlights I froze. I should have gone on. My hand was too strong to even be overly concerned about a weak opening. Don't agree with the proposal that 7♣ is likely. I find that, in especially tournament play, the (contrived) hands often have a nasty pitfall (e.g., stack of trumps, partner missing 5-card suit controls, weird opponent distribution, off-side finesses, etc.) built in. One spade and one or two diamond trick losses are what I might list as 'likely' without more info about the hands.

 

My partner doesn't use Splinter bids although my HCP count was good for it.

 

How, indeed, did 3NT become weaker than the lower bid 3♠. The responder is in the driver's seat and should have the option of setting the contract at 3♠ or 3NT if opener is weak. Leftover pre-1995 thinking in ACBL?

 

Thank you neilkaz. :)

[hrothgar]

 

I find that, in especially tournament play, the (contrived) hands often have a nasty pitfall (e.g., stack of trumps, partner missing 5-card suit controls, weird opponent distribution, off-side finesses, etc.) built in. One spade and one or two diamond trick losses are what I might list as 'likely' without more info about the hands.

 

If you are distorting your bidding on the belief that the ACBL is deliberately biasing the hands you have much bigger problems than your Jacoby 2NT bidding

[Bbradley62]

How, indeed, did 3NT become weaker than the lower bid 3♠. The responder is in the driver's seat and should have the option of setting the contract at 3♠ or 3NT if opener is weak. Leftover pre-1995 thinking in ACBL?

Neither opener nor responder "should have the option of setting the contract at 3♠". It is an integral part of Jacoby 2NT that you are in a game-forcing auction. If responder is not strong enough to force to game opposite a minimum opener (however the partnership defines that minimum), then responder should make a limit raise, not bid Jacoby 2NT.

[leebca]

I wouldn't dare do that, but bidding 7♣ without more knowledge of my partner's hand is not my game.

[leebca]

I disagree Bbradley. Only the responder here knows if his hand is opening or larger. The query to opener establishes the strength or the distribution of the opener's hand and then still, only the responder knows the bigger picture. Responder may retreat with low-side opener after learning partner may have 11 HCPs.

[Bbradley62]

I disagree Bbradley. Only the responder here knows if his hand is opening or larger. The query to opener establishes the strength or the distribution of the opener's hand and then still, only the responder knows the bigger picture. Responder may retreat with low-side opener after learning partner may have 11 HCPs.

But, according to your first post, you want your partner to respond 4♠ with a crappy total minimum; the only way you can stop below game is if she bids 3♠, which you say you want her to do with a better hand (whether it should be the "medium" or the "maximum" hand is apparently up for discussion).

[gszes]

gszes,

 

Neither conventions/tools are used by us. Unless I'm mis-understanding your suggestion. . .My partner, with the hand held, would pass my 5♣ thinking I bid game on my own, without any knowledge of a spade fit, only believing he had an opening hand and 5+ spades. Holding two clubs, my partner would proudly have put dummy down. We generally agree that the faster/higher we bid, the less we have.

 

The Jacoby 2NT seemed to me at the time the lesser of the evils -- two out of three requirements, a fit immediately agreed to, and conveying at least opening values. It seemed to me to be a springboard towards slam investigations with the conventions we utilize. It ran through my brain, albeit briefly, that all other bids by me and then by partner would likely miss a potential slam, with our conventions.

 

Bbradley62,

 

A 3NT rebid by partner would have worked, I think, but it would be a stretch for this partner having two doubletons, even though the hand might be considered medium. I would have bid pass 3NT for sure and we would go on to slam.

 

5♠ would be unlikely to make (from my perspective) with partner having 11-12 HCP (e.g., missing the ♠K). I couldn't muster bidding past the 4♠ facing the minimum: an 11-12 HCP hand with a 5-card spade suit. I appreciate your opinion that I should have bid on, though. That's the reply to the question.

 

My suggestion of 5c was over p 4s bid ie 1s 2n 4s 5c:))))