What does this double mean?

[whereagles]

Well, SJS might indeed save space, but there are trade-offs

 

A.

1D 1H

1S 2C (4th suit)

2NT 3H = 6 cards GF

 

B.

1D 2H

 

In A you're 1 level higher, but you already know pard has a min with 44 or 54 diam/spade.

In B you're 1 level lower, but opener will have a harder time describing his hand with a max (even playing precision)

[Chamaco]

A.

1D 1H

1S 2C (4th suit)

2NT 3H = 6 cards GF

 

Yes but it says nothing of the quality of your suit.

In this sequence 3H strongly suggests H, but pard can retreat to 3NT, and when you have, say, KQJT98x, all you want is starting cues at thelowest level possible.

 

Going via 4sf with slammish 1suited hands just leads to awkward auctions most of the times, because it does not guarantees the suit quality.

 

B.

1D 2H

 

In A you're 1 level higher, but you already know pard has a min with 44 or 54 diam/spade.

In B you're 1 level lower, but opener will have a harder time describing his hand with a max (even playing precision)

 

In most hands suited for SJS, you are mostly worried about sidesuit controls, not shape of opener.

Typically, SJS has a void or singleton, and would like simply to check a critical suit before asking keycards.

Actually, a case can be made to allow for CABs by responder or control responses by opener.

[whereagles]

I see your point. SJS do indeed make your life easier when used properly :) Still, I prefer to play weak jump shifts because..

 

1. They come up much more often

2. Put tremendous pressure on 4th player

 

Point 2 is interesting. Playing precision the pressure is much less because opener is limited and will be much more reluctant to double for penalties. Thus I seem to be arriving at the conclusion that WJS are not that important in precision. But more thought would have to be given to this matter.

[Chamaco]

I see your point. SJS do indeed make your life easier when used properly :) Still, I prefer to play weak jump shifts because..

 

1. They come up much more often

2. Put tremendous pressure on 4th player

 

Point 2 is interesting. Playing precision the pressure is much less because opener is limited and will be much more reluctant to double for penalties. Thus I seem to be arriving at the conclusion that WJS are not that important in precision. But more thought would have to be given to this matter.

The idea that of privileging destructive bidding to constructive is, IMO, cetainly sounder at MP.

I value the ease of slam bidding a big plus in team matches, so the form of scoring might pull its weight.

 

Now, to discuss your point, e.g. WJS in a 2/1-based scheme vs WJS in a limited-opener schme such as Precision.

 

1. it depends whether JS are defined as "REALLY weak" or "intermediate".

In my textbooks on 2/1 or SAYC, a "really weak" JS is defined as a long 1-suited with no defensive tricks:

Hand 1: JTxxxx-xxx-Qxx-x is about par for such a WJS.

 

Hand 2: QJTxxx-Kxx-xxx-x is already too strong for a WJS, according to such criterion, because, in a 2/1 scheme, opener can still hold a big hand, so the first hand is a danger signal to opener if he holds a big hand without fit.

 

The same does not hold true in a precision context: in Precision, Weak JS can be stronger than hand 1, because opener is limited.

 

Before moving to Precision, I had agreed REALLY WEAK JS (see hand 1) over opener. However, in 2.5 years, they never came up.

In the meantime, a significant number of hands suitable for SJS came up.

 

So, I'd say that , in the comparison SJS vs REALLY WEAK JS, SJS wins even in frequency of occurrence.

 

-------------------------------------

 

A totally different bird is the intermediate/"weakish" JS.

This makes more sense when responding to a limited opener, especially if they are wide range (0-7 hcp, at least 9 losers) or so.

These certainly put much presure, and they are more frequent than the yarborough JS.

 

Still, I value SJS more (at least at teams), just a matter of tastes I guess :)

[mr1303]

Last time I made a strong jump shift was in a £1 rubber bridge game.

 

I held:

 

KJx

Kx

A

AKQxxxx

 

and partner opened 1H. The auction continued

 

1H 3C

3D 4C

P

 

I threw my cards at him. When I picked them up again I claimed 13 tricks at trick 3 (won opening lead, all followed to 2 rounds of trumps)

[Chamaco]

Last time I made a strong jump shift was in a £1 rubber bridge game.

If you use as criterion a 5-5.5 losers hand with self sufficient suit, you'll find it comes up more often.

 

You can use SJS with:

 

KQT9xxx-AQx-x-Ax

 

15 hcp but 4.5 losers, and the hand can be 1 losers weaker than this one.

 

E.g.

AQJTxxxx-xx-A-xx

11 hcp but 4.5 losers

(and in fact it's easy to see how, even a misfit hand can have slam if pard has anything resembling an opener)

 

 

Do not use hcp but losers+ suit quality for SJS definition: SJS will be well-defined anyways, but they'll come up more often.

 

BTW: I use SJS only at the 2 level (in a major). The SJS-type hand in a minor is shown by biding 4m over pard's likely 3NT bid.

[whereagles]

Yeah, indeed WJS are theoretically made on total rubbish. You do have a point that real rubbish comes up about as often as a good hand. I "solved" this by requiring WJS = good suit, at most a queen outside. Can be as low QJ9xxx or JTxxxxx, or as high as KQJTxx (AQJxxx if playing precision). I guess this qualifies as intermediate in your definitions ;)

[Gerben42]

This is my big problem with Rubber Bridge. People might have a different idea about the bidding system (like in the example where partner passed 4♣) and you can't afford things like that. It's already expensive enough with all my own and partner's normal mistakes.

 

I've only played rubber with people I know so at least I know what they play, avoiding this problem. How do people cope with this?

[Walddk]

I threw my cards at him.

You are kidding, are you not?

 

Roland

[mr1303]

The idea seems to be that only ultra simple systems are allowed, so there aren't misunderstandings on conventions. Whether partner will pass what to you is a 100% forcing auction however, is the luck of the draw.

 

Things like negative doubles aren't allowed, apparantly they're too complicated. So you end up saying at the start of the rubber something like

 

"Strong, stayman twice and double"

 

Which means Strong (15-17) NT, stayman 2C and 3C after 1 or 2NT, and double as take-out to pre-empts. You can use Baron instead, but thats it. You can also play Fishbien or however it's spelt to pre-empts, but absolutely no-one wants to.

 

Acol 2s are the only 2 level bids allowed (at least in the UK), and we're forced to play 4 card majors (yuck) as well.

[Fluffy]

I threw my cards at him.

You are kidding, are you not?

 

Roland

Why not? :-P, I wouldn't be surprised to see that once in my life, specially when you are losing money for it.

 

I've seen throwing 1 card to fly all over (partner leading singleton trump against 7, and the other 'throwing' his trump Q on first trick).