Two No Trump Jacoby

[Lovera]

If you are going to retain 3M as forcing, I'd suggest you have this completely backwards (2nt = unbalanced, 3M = balanced). With the balanced hands, you want to use 2nt, because this gives max room to tease out both opener's shape + strength and figure out if the values of the balanced hand are working or not working. Use 3M as some splinter range (since you wanted to keep 3nt = natural 15-17) instead, different from 1S-4c. e.g. 1S-4c = 12-14 hcp, 1s-3s = 9-11 hcp any shortness (opener bid 3nt to ask where).

 

2nt = balanced or semi-balanced (with good side cd 5 suit normally 2/1), or too strong to splinter.

 

 

I've infact said 1M-3M bal. 14-18, 1M-2NT unbal.(+5-4-2-2 shape) 14-18, 1♠-4♠ instead is 6-8 five spade supp. or better my Keycard Oklahoma (*)1♠-4♣ idem with 1 Key (A/K of spade), 1♠-3♠ is 6-11 if interferred while in 1M-2m answer of partner sure 12/+ points and a second bid or a delayed raise with 12-13 points raising opener at third level.

(*)=As i have already said in "1♥-p-4♥" (topic-see) i use "Oklahoma" convention to give partner information of number of Ace(s) in this way : it's estabilished by this conv. that 4♣=1 Ace, 4♦=2 Aces whilest with no ace 4 of trump and opener values if information serves and if not corrects in 4 of trump. But because i see you like insert keycard and to have two Aces could be minus frequent it can change in 4♣=1 keycard, 4♦=2 keycards and 4 of trump with 0 keycard (termed "keycard-Oklahoma").

[Lovera]

Have you heard of the "pudding raise"? This is a bid of 3NT showing 4-card support in a balanced, minimum GF (13-15, give or take, depending on your opening style. This bid may allow you to change your other raises to a more effective scheme.

 

Also, a bid of 2NT as a high-card raise to 3 or better is very playable. In fact I used to play it with my mixed pivot team (someone suggested it once and you don't do much system revision with people you play 9 boards with once a year.)

 

Finally, splinters have been mentioned since they take up so much space they need to be very specific. My strong preference is to play them as 3-4 controls (A=2, K=1) in a hand not strong enough for a high-card GF raise, or a monster that is going to go on after partner's signoff. The reason for the emphasis on controls rather than point-count (some people say, eg 8-11) is that you are not going to find the thin slams with 10 points in Jacks and Queens. And if you are not trying to find thin slams, you needn't bother to play splinters,

 

I agree about splinter that i don 't like much while for i.e. 1♥-3NT is 15-17 balanced with points in the other three suits and xx as heart supp.

[Lovera]

In Scandinavia, the forcing 2N raise usually goes under the name of 'Stenberg' (after its inventior, the Swedish player Alvar Stenberg). Most Scandinavian players seem to prefer a version where 2N is only INV+, though, and that version is also called 'Invitt-Stenberg' (Eng.: 'Invitational Stenberg).

 

Natural continuations after (Invitt-)Stenberg are probably still dominant, but the following structure seems to have become quite popular recently:

 

1M-2N; ?:

 

3♣ = lower half of 1M range

...3♦ = GF relay

......3♥ = singleton/void in clubs

......3♠ = singleton/void in diamonds

......3N = singleton/void in the other major

......4♣+ = cuebidding w/ no singleton/void

...3M = INV

...4M = to play

3♦ = upper half of 1M range, no singleton/void

...3♥ = singleton/void in clubs

...3♠ = singleton/void in diamonds

...3N = singelton/void in the other major

...4♣+ = cuebidding w/ no singelton/void

3♥ = upper half of 1M range, singleton/void in clubs

3♠ = upper half of 1M range, singelton/void in diamonds

3N = upper half of 1M range, singelton/void in the other major

 

Some also play

 

4m = 5+ m, values concentrated in M and m

4♥(M=♠) = 5+ hearts, values concentrated in the majors

 

The above responses to 2N are sometimes called 'Swedish responses' to Jacoby/Stenberg, I believe.

 

Ok, but this one is artificial for me 🙂.

[nullve]

Ok, but this one is artificial for me ��.

What can be more artificial than standard Jacoby 2NT where,for example, Opener's 3♣ rebid shows 0-1 clubs? In the structure I described, both Opener and Responder actually tend to have length (i.e. 3+ cards) in the suit bid.

 

I think you're confusing 'natural' with 'the suit bid is also the one talked about'.

[Lovera]

What can be more artificial than standard Jacoby 2NT where,for example, Opener's 3♣ rebid shows 0-1 clubs? In the structure I described, both Opener and Responder actually tend to have length (i.e. 3+ cards) in the suit bid.

 

I think you're confusing 'natural' with 'the suit bid is also the one talked about'.

 

In our days the system are more artificial of those with a natural structure. I than tend to avoid to have many biddings with steps.

[Lovera]

You can find the explanation on the Oklahoma Convention by entering my nickname Lovera in the sub-forum "Non-natural Bridge Discussion" as I indicated also when you go to "Find My Content" (before entering), where the Swiss Convention is also discussed. The highly interdictive nature combined with the indications regarding the Keycards make it even more effective. There are two variants of the CEK system (R. Maroder, L. Paolucci, A. Camera) of the convention of probable Italian origin (Roman Club) while mine, more than a third variant can be considered an integration. The application reduced only to the unbalanced hands of the Jacoby 2NT is completed with the use of the jump support (1M-3M) in response to the opening equally only for the balanced ones and therefore: 4M indicates a minimum balanced, 3NT a maximum balanced while cuebidding a minimum unbalanced if then there is a sign off in game or maximum if you continue with cue bids.

[rmnka447]

In Scandinavia, the forcing 2N raise usually goes under the name of 'Stenberg' (after its inventior, the Swedish player Alvar Stenberg). Most Scandinavian players seem to prefer a version where 2N is only INV+, though, and that version is also called 'Invitt-Stenberg' (Eng.: 'Invitational Stenberg).

 

Natural continuations after (Invitt-)Stenberg are probably still dominant, but the following structure seems to have become quite popular recently:

 

1M-2N; ?:

 

3♣ = lower half of 1M range

...3♦ = GF relay

......3♥ = singleton/void in clubs

......3♠ = singleton/void in diamonds

......3N = singleton/void in the other major

......4♣+ = cuebidding w/ no singleton/void

...3M = INV

...4M = to play

3♦ = upper half of 1M range, no singleton/void

...3♥ = singleton/void in clubs

...3♠ = singleton/void in diamonds

...3N = singelton/void in the other major

...4♣+ = cuebidding w/ no singelton/void

3♥ = upper half of 1M range, singleton/void in clubs

3♠ = upper half of 1M range, singelton/void in diamonds

3N = upper half of 1M range, singelton/void in the other major

 

Some also play

 

4m = 5+ m, values concentrated in M and m

4♥(M=♠) = 5+ hearts, values concentrated in the majors

 

The above responses to 2N are sometimes called 'Swedish responses' to Jacoby/Stenberg, I believe.

 

My teammates like to use this structure. They point out that one advantage of this approach is that the 3 ♣ response to 2 NT doesn't divulge much about opener's hand. So, when responder is just interested in game, game is bid with virtually no information being given out about opener's hand than it's just a minimum range hand. This is useful on hands where opener divulging a singleton can aid the defense.

 

Yes, there is some artificiality in whatever responses to 2 NT you choose. But they also provide some assistance to the partnership in defining what is the potential target level of the hand. If, with the original Jacoby responses, the opener shows extras (3 NT balanced 15-16, 3 M balanced 17+), the responder can anticipate and begin possible slam exploration with an appropriate hand. Ditto shortness bids or 2nd suit 4 level bids can point out wasted values or strong fits to responder.

 

I think there's no doubt that keeping at least some part of the 3 level available for showing controls can aid in getting key controls identified for possible slams below the game level. At the very least, that will aid in bidding slams where 1 M - 3 M forcing precludes showing the control(s). That can allow bidding to continue past game to the 5 level with little risk. After 1 M - 3 M forcing and the inability to show the controls below game, the partnership must guess whether to continue slam exploration and risk the game contract, or, potentially miss a cold slam when the controls actually exist.

 

My favorite partner and I play our own homegrown Jacoby responses to take advantage of some concepts discussed in the Granovetter book on conventions --

 

3 ♣ - minor singleton

.. 3 ♦ relay asking which minor

... 3 ♥ - ♣ shortness

... 3 ♠ - ♦ shortness

 

3 ♦ - big hand 17+

.. 3 new suit - control

.. 3 M, 3 NT waiting bids starting control bidding

 

3 OM - shortness in OM

 

3 M - minimum hand, no shortness

.. 3 NT -relay asking for more info

... new suit shows concentration of values AND 2 honors in M

... 4 M -less than 2 honors in M

 

3 NT - 15-16 no shortness

 

4 in new suit - good 2nd suit usually 5-5 or better

 

4 M - minimum no shortness but strong trumps (AKQxx or better)

[pescetom]

In Scandinavia, the forcing 2N raise usually goes under the name of 'Stenberg' (after its inventior, the Swedish player Alvar Stenberg). Most Scandinavian players seem to prefer a version where 2N is only INV+, though, and that version is also called 'Invitt-Stenberg' (Eng.: 'Invitational Stenberg).

 

Natural continuations after (Invitt-)Stenberg are probably still dominant, but the following structure seems to have become quite popular recently:

 

1M-2N; ?:

 

3♣ = lower half of 1M range

...3♦ = GF relay

......3♥ = singleton/void in clubs

......3♠ = singleton/void in diamonds

......3N = singleton/void in the other major

......4♣+ = cuebidding w/ no singleton/void

...3M = INV

...4M = to play

3♦ = upper half of 1M range, no singleton/void

...3♥ = singleton/void in clubs

...3♠ = singleton/void in diamonds

...3N = singelton/void in the other major

...4♣+ = cuebidding w/ no singelton/void

3♥ = upper half of 1M range, singleton/void in clubs

3♠ = upper half of 1M range, singelton/void in diamonds

3N = upper half of 1M range, singelton/void in the other major

 

Some also play

 

4m = 5+ m, values concentrated in M and m

4♥(M=♠) = 5+ hearts, values concentrated in the majors

 

The above responses to 2N are sometimes called 'Swedish responses' to Jacoby/Stenberg, I believe.

 

We currently play something similar but simpler, I've taken note for when I find a more ambitious partner.

Do you have any idea of the real origin of 2NT as INV+ raise?

I've seen it attributed to NL, but no idea how sure this is or when, let alone a name.

[steve2005]

I think using 2NT as limit+ makes a lot of sense. You should be able to be more efficient and save a bid. This is especially true if your are interested in changing the responses to avoid giving away info when both minimum etc.

 

Other ideas i've found have merit:

3M as a 4-card constructive raise. Now you can do without Bergen.

 

Split ranges of splinters are good but unless you have a active technical partnership is not worth trouble.