Who should've done more?

[Cyberyeti]

I wonder why some players objected to 3 Sp. What is wrong with first jump= slasm possibility and 2nd round game force.With this unerstanding since N is slightly better than for game should have bid 4 H as cue. S V Bhide

 

Because the OP stated 3♠ was not completely forcing in their system

[maartenxq]

As 1 ♦- 2 ♠ is weak nowadays people tend to forget how to bid their strong 1 suiters.

xyz i one solution, but does not apply here. 4th suit would be alternative, but you could also agree that 3 ♠ is forcing.

1 ♦ - 3 ♠ would be 6+ and invitational in this approach. As it went I think north should surely bid 4 ♥.

 

Maarten Baltussen

[P_Marlowe]

<snip>

I conclude that S should've bid 2H 4SF, though some expressed the thought that 3S is not a serious underbid, as it is gameforcing opposite almost any ordinary opener.

<snip>

The question to answer is, how wide is the range of hands, that can bid 3S.

Traditionnally you have a description of 6+ and 10-12, keeping in mind, that the 10-12 may already

include some distributional points.

If you play constructive WJO, than you can make a rebid by responder forcing, and the number of invitational

strength hands, that go via this route can increase.

Also "almost any ordinary opener", ..., if opener has xx in spades, the suit will make 7 tricks 50%+ of the

time, how is opener supposed to know this? The 7th card is big.

It is comparable to the 4th card facing a 5 card major opener, peoble try to get the info across, that they

have a 9 card fit.

In other words, I would keep the set of hands tight, that go via the 3S route, and if I do this, it is quite

clear, that opener has only the option to raise or pass, if he holds at most strong NT strength.

 

But as I have already said, we are approaching judgement call land, and I will never discuss judgement calls,

just say, that this would not be my choice, for what ever worth this may be to you.

[mrt2000]

Hmmm, I'm just wondering exactly how good a contract 6♠ actually is. If you get a ♥ lead and ♠ are 3-1 then unless ♦ are very favourable I fancy you'll go off in 6♠. Even if ♠ are 2-2 it's still far from laydown. Perhaps not such a good slam after all.

[JanisW]

Hmmm, I'm just wondering exactly how good a contract 6♠ actually is. If you get a ♥ lead and ♠ are 3-1 then unless ♦ are very favourable I fancy you'll go off in 6♠. Even if ♠ are 2-2 it's still far from laydown. Perhaps not such a good slam after all.

 

slam is excellent even on a ♥lead and ♠ 3-1.

You'll only need ♦ no worse then 4-2 and the doubleton ♦ opposite the ♠-single.

1. ♥A

2. ♦ to K

3. ♥ruff

4. ♦ to J

5. ♥ ruff

6. A♦ discard ♣ and if ruffed, it usually was the 3 bagger. If there was one in the first place

 

Slam is not cold obviously but decent.

 

We play wSJ so

1♠ followed by 2♠ is inv.

1♠ followed by 4♠ is game obviously

1♠ followed by 4SF and 3 ♠ is gf with slaminterest.

leaving [1SP] followed by 3♠ as almost gf, top of inv. range needing just a little help, that could be

- Primary honours (preferably A) in the other suits and not QJs as they tend to be wasted

- something useful in ♠

The suit-quality is just a tiny bit too weak to bid 4♠ directly in particular if you have 3♠ available.

 

The question is whether South has the strongest possible 3♠ bid or the weakest possible 4SF. I understand that both camps have their point.

 

The same seems to be true for North. Does he have the strongest possible "only 4♠-bid" or the weakest possible 4♥-bid? I guess a 3rd spade or the A♣ instead of the K would surely make 4♥ the clear favorite.

 

If one went with the stronger option the other would've always followed.

 

regards

JW

[P_Marlowe]

<snip>

We play wSJ so

1♠ followed by 2♠ is inv.

1♠ followed by 4♠ is game obviously

1♠ followed by 4SF and 3 ♠ is gf with slaminterest.

leaving [1SP] followed by 3♠ as almost gf, top of inv. range needing just a little help, that could be

- Primary honours (preferably A) in the other suits and not QJs as they tend to be wasted

- something useful in ♠

The suit-quality is just a tiny bit too weak to bid 4♠ directly in particular if you have 3♠ available.

<snip>

If you play 2♠ as inv. (*), than 3♠ is gf, it is usually used for choice of games to allow to decide,

if 3NT or 4 ♠ is better, the route via 4SF showes SI, but is also setting trumps.

Assuming this agreement in place, than 3S is perfect, and I ok with a cue by opener, in case partner has magic

cards, I am still not convinced that you will reach 6S in a controlled manner, but at least it is a reasonable start.

 

(*) This may be a matter of words / understanding: for me a inv. 2♠ is showing 10-12, not 7/8-10.

The main difference is the strength of the WJO, is it crap, say 4-7, or is is 6-9.

[GrahamJson]

The 2/1 system used in the Bridge Magazine Bidding Challenge is claimed to be based on current expert practice. In this situation it uses;

 

Jump to 2S = weak

1S followed by 2S = constructive

1S followed by 3S = Game force

All fourth suit bids = Game force

 

Using this method the 3S rebid is about right.

[iandayre]

It is something like: if you do not have any excuse, you will have to bid game.

 

Well this is your real problem. 3S should be clearly invitational, not forcing. If there is any confusion on that, both are to blame. S hand is worth a force, should bid 4th suit.

[marklaf]

I believe this is a hand that partners should talk about. For me a 3 spade jump is quite strong(only pass if you opened a real dog) so in that context I believe partner should cue bid.

[miamijd]

The 2/1 system used in the Bridge Magazine Bidding Challenge is claimed to be based on current expert practice. In this situation it uses;

 

Jump to 2S = weak

1S followed by 2S = constructive

1S followed by 3S = Game force

All fourth suit bids = Game force

 

Using this method the 3S rebid is about right.

 

This is NOT a normal structure and it stinks, to boot. Let's say you have:

 

KJT9xx xx Kx xxx

 

What are you supposed to do here after 1D? Make a WJS? I sure hope not. This hand is way too strong for that. Lose the KC and you have a WJS.

 

OK, so you bid 1S and partner bids 2C. Now what? 2S is an invite? Then you have no bid! If you're saying 2S shows this hand, then what do you do with

 

KJT9xx xx Ax Kxx

 

That's an invite; what can I do with it? Can't bid 2S; can't bid 3S; can't use 4th suit.

 

I know of no structure where BOTH the second round jump AND fourth suit are GF. Can't be.

 

In addition, I know of no "Bridge Magazine" Challenge the Champs. I think you mean "The Bridge World." In Bridge World Standard:

 

After a one-level new-suit response and opener's simple new-suit rebid:

(a) two notrump or three of any suit previously bid is invitational;

(b) a fourth-suit bid at the two- or three-level is forcing to game;

 

...

 

This makes sense. The 3S bid is an invite; 4SF is GF.

 

Cheers,

mike

[GrahamJson]

I mean Bridge Magazine http://bridgemagazine.co.uk

 

From their system description:

 

“Jump shifts are weak at the two-level and invitational at the three-level. Bidding and rebidding a suit is invitational, bidding and jump rebidding a suit is FG.”

 

There are twenty expert players on the bidding panel from around the world, including Mike Lawrence amongst others.

 

Until the end of 2015 the BM system used a jump rebid as invitational. If I remember rightly several panelists complained that this was not in line with modern expert practice, hence it was changed to GF, along with many other fundamental changes.

[Zelandakh]

KJT9xx xx Kx xxx

 

What are you supposed to do here after 1D? Make a WJS? I sure hope not. This hand is way too strong for that. Lose the KC and you have a WJS.

This goes back a little to nomenclature. There are 2 schools of thought concerning WJSs. The first, which you appear to follow, is that cover a range of approximately 3-7. In this case an additional (constructive) range is required in addition to normal invites. The other school of thought is for hands to retain their traditional structure (weak/INV/GF) and for a WJS just to be in the bottom range, so about 6-b10. It sounds from Graham's quote as though BMS uses the second method, which would make this hand not too strong.