Rebid after strong jump shift

[jallerton]

[hv=pc=n&s=skqthaq853dckq765&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1cp2hp2np]133|200|1C=4+<br>[/hv]

 

You are playing Acol with strong NT and 4-card majors. 1♣= 4+ clubs, but with a weak NT and 4/4 major/minor, partner would normally open the major.

 

Your 2♥ bid is a strong jump shift. What now?

 

 

 

Edit: surplus word removed.

Edited February 10, 2017 by jallerton

[Tramticket]

You are South - so presumably it was your jump shift.

 

You are in a game forcing auction and it is surely normal to clarify your hand type and show that your jump was based on club support - bid 3C. What am I missing? Does 3D/4D guarantee club support?

[ggwhiz]

I have a partnership that does play strong jump shifts, m - M in a 2/1 strong nt system. Definitely in the minority and this ain't one.

 

Ours show at least a play for a max of one loser in the suit opposite a stiff and consequently the 2nt bid categorically denies the spade Ace. I'll be interested to see what 2nt shows or denies with your style but it seems like pre-empting yourself where surely a 1♥ response followed by anything game forcing showing or followed by clubs would be more economical.

 

Otherwise I bid 3♣ but again, depending on what 2nt shows or denies I may be pinning the tail on the donkey next round.

[wanoff]

4♣ showing primary support

though 4♦ if partner can be trusted to interpret this. To set hearts you would probably just repeat them.

[Cyberyeti]

I play SJS but in a weak NT context, our agreements are that anything except NT and hearts unequivocally shows a club raise, 4♦ would be voidwood. For us we don't need 2N for a weak NT so it shows short hearts, but I don't think that needs to affect the above agreement.

 

Which suit does partner open with a (23)44 weak NT or 4144 ?

[steve2005]

You are South - so presumably it was your jump shift.

 

You are in a game forcing auction and it is surely normal to clarify your hand type and show that your jump was based on club support - bid 3C. What am I missing? Does 3D/4D guarantee club support?

this is correct 3C

[Fluffy]

3♣ is certainly a LA

[mr1303]

3C looks automatic unless I had agreements to the contrary. 4C and 4D are possible but I'd like to have discussed what those hands specifically show. Why shouldn't they show solid hearts and shortage rather than club support?

[JonnyQuest]

I would be concerned that the 4-level ♣ call could be misconstrued as an auto-splinter. You're in a GF, what's the rush?

 

3♣.

[SteveMoe]

3♣

Noting this is an excellent hand for XYZ,

1♣ - 1♥

1♠/NT - 3♣....

[paulg]

This is an easy 4♦ although I doubt many Acol players at my club would bid it, so if it's a poll you'd need to consider the class of player.

 

3♦ should show shortage with club fit and hands with solid hearts and slam interest rebid 3♥, so 4♦ is left to show a diamond void and is the perfect description of this hand. It also gives partner an easy 4♥ cue bid with the ♥K which would be good to hear.

[rmnka447]

Can't speak specifically to ACOL.

 

But I think a strong jump shift is OK on this hand especially with opener known to have 4+ ♣. It fits the "your suit, my suit, or NT" hand types requirement in most write ups of SJSs I've seen. Responder's hands actually fall into a few well defined categories -- a big hand with a very strong suit with or without support for, a big hand with a decent suit and extraordinary trump support for opener's suit, or, the "rock crusher" balanced hand.

 

The problem is that most people don't have good agreements how to continue after the jump shift.

 

I think the bidding methodology that looks best to me is one that prioritizes opener's rebids. Here, they would be:

 

Any splinter - agree ♥ showing shortness

3 ♥ - agree ♥

3 ♣ - no ♥ fit, but ♣ suit to a couple high honors

2 NT - none of the above

 

I think opener's actual rebid, whether intentional or not, actually conforms to the above. South can draw the inference that opener doesn't have 3 ♥ as there was no raise. So, the chance for a ♣ slam looks extremely good ( ♠ A/♣ A, or, ♠ A, stiff ♥ and ♣ Jxxxx would be enough). Responder must set ♣ as trump. So the possible rebids are 3 ♣, 4 ♣, or 4 ♦.

 

3 ♣ sets trump and keeps the bidding low,

4 ♣ set trumps and shows extraordinary trump support, and,

4 ♦ is a splinter in ♦.

 

I like 4 ♣ as the best description.

[jogs]

Bid 3♣. You don't want to hear 3♦ from pard. That would be duplication.

3♠ by pard is wonderful. Spade ace with no wasted ace in diamonds.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=skqthaq853dckq765&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1c(4+ !C)p2hp2np]200|300| jallerton writes: "You are playing Acol with strong NT and 4-card majors. 1♣= 4+ clubs, but with a weak NT and 4/4 major/minor, partner would normally open the major. Your 2♥ bid is a strong jump shift. What now?

 

Assuming that your jump shift promises either near solid ♥s or primary ♣ support, IMO, further suit jumps should be shortages (probably voids as PaulG suggests). You should agree that they confirm one hand-type or the other.

 

Lacking such an agreement, I feel that you should rebid 3♣ to avoid ambiguity, in case partner takes a jump, even in ♣s, to be an auto-splinter.

[/hv]

[silvr bull]

This is an easy 4♦ although I doubt many Acol players at my club would bid it, so if it's a poll you'd need to consider the class of player.

 

3♦ should show shortage with club fit and hands with solid hearts and slam interest rebid 3♥, so 4♦ is left to show a diamond void and is the perfect description of this hand. It also gives partner an easy 4♥ cue bid with the ♥K which would be good to hear.

Couldn't South have been dealt A AKQxxx KQxxxx --? South must jump soon to show strength, and the 2H strong jump shift immediately is best works best for me. Clearly with my example hand, South needs to be able to bid 3D to show Ds. Some partnerships may agree that a later jump (like 4D here), when no suit has been agreed yet, is a good 2nd suit. There is little clarity in South's 3D or a jump to 4D unless that specific auction has been discussed and agreed to before.

 

With the actual South hand, I like the 2H SJS, but then South must clarify good C support by bidding 3C at this point.

[Cyberyeti]

Couldn't South have been dealt A AKQxxx KQxxxx --? South must jump soon to show strength, and the 2H strong jump shift immediately is best. Clearly with my example hand, South needs to be able to bid 3D to show Ds. Some partnerships may agree that a later jump (like 4D here), when no suit has been agreed yet, is a good 2nd suit. There is little clarity in South's 3D or a jump to 4D unless that specific auction has been discussed and agreed to before.

 

With the actual South hand, I like the 2H SJS, but then South must clarify good C support by bidding 3C at this point.

 

No he couldn't, you don't jump with 2 suited non fit hands like that.

[Zelandakh]

Couldn't South have been dealt A AKQxxx KQxxxx --?

There was a time when the majority of the world's elite would make a SJS on this hand but time have changed and the modern preference (if SJS are even used, which is itself rare) is for a SJS to be made on a much more specific set of hands. Experience has shown that it is better to go slowly with hands of the type above so as to maximise the exchange of information.

[jallerton]

This is an easy 4♦ although I doubt many Acol players at my club would bid it, so if it's a poll you'd need to consider the class of player.

 

3♦ should show shortage with club fit and hands with solid hearts and slam interest rebid 3♥, so 4♦ is left to show a diamond void and is the perfect description of this hand. It also gives partner an easy 4♥ cue bid with the ♥K which would be good to hear.

 

How many partnerships do you think will have discussed the meaning of jumps to 4♣ and 4♦? Without discussion, wouldn't you be concerned that partner might take your 4♦ bid as an autosplinter?

 

Although there is a chance that partner might interpret a jump to 4♣ as an autosplinter also, my view is that autosplinters should not apply in partner's suit unless the sequence has been specifically agreed.

[jallerton]

3♣ is certainly a LA

 

Yes, indeed. So far 3♣ has been chosen by 80% (16 out of 20) respondents.

 

At the table, South jumped all the way to 6♣ over 2NT. What do you think of that?

 

One more thing. At the table, North alerted 2♥ and, on enquiry from West, described it as "Some sort of club raise, but I can't remember the details, sorry". What do you think of the 6♣ bid now?

[Cyberyeti]

 

One more thing. At the table, North alerted 2♥ and, on enquiry from West, described it as "Some sort of club raise, but I can't remember the details, sorry". What do you think of the 6♣ bid now?

 

Blatant use of UI, he was worried 3♣ wasn't going to prove forcing.

 

But really the "any rebid other than ♥/NT shows clubs as well" is something I discuss with pickup partners, partners other than the one I play most of my bridge with might well take 4♦ as a normal splinter, but should know it agrees clubs.

[kenberg]

N has made it clear that he is not certain of the meaning of 2H. After that declaration, surely S is not allowed to jump to 6C. I don't see this remotely as a close call.

[Fluffy]

I assume you don't really need a BBF poll for this one, so to whoever says that 6♣ is the logical call I will tell them:

 

No. You are wrong, you have blatantly used the UI of partner not knowing he was on a GF situation to jump to slam to minimice possible damage. The only reason why you think 6♣ is a reasonable call is because of cognitive dissonance. That is, that your will to win has triumph over your ethics this time, and your brain is creating the ilussion that you followed right ethics because it is unable to sustain the truth.

 

Don't worry much because each and every brige player in the world has fallen to the same trap (no matter what they tell you)

[mycroft]

3♣ seems automatic. 4♦ seems brilliant, if it will be taken as a club splinter. I'm not sure I'd catch that at the table, and even if I was ready to catch it, I would expect around here for it to be an autosplinter for hearts instead.

 

6♣ means "170 is a bad score; -100 won't be much worse."

 

What to rule to, based on the UI, is interesting. Polling it seems right, but presenting a poll with "so, what was 2♥?" "You're not really sure, some sort of club raise." may prove tricky.