[kenrexford]

I would open 1♠ with the South hand if I did not have the club Jack. For that matter, you can take the club Jack and change the diamond Queen to the Jack.

With the North hand, I am torn how to respond. I am not muddying the waters by responding 2♥, though. It depends upon partner's sense of humor how I bid. For the record, a 2♥ causes no problems. Partner rebids 2♠ or 3♦, depending upon schooling, Responder agrees spades by bidding 3♠, and one of us bypasses 4♣ to deny a club control. The other signs off. Easy.

If my partner is very tolerant of, and perhaps even endorses, some of my more idiosyncratic ideas, I'll respond the "obvious" 2♦. As I play, this may be, in essence, an "advanced cue" of sorts (a cuebiddable diamond holding and a spade fit). Opener will like that and bid 3♦. I'll now return to 3♠, setting trumps. Again, one of us will not cue clubs, and the other will promptly sign off at game. Easy again.

Now, as to why I dislike Jacoby. After Responder bids 2NT, Opener makes some call that bypasses any ability to indicate the possession of a club control, or lack thereof. Now, silly slams are bid.

The response structure that I use works decently to improve upon classic techniques.

Opener has many options after 2NT. Without explanation, trust that 3♦, 3♥, 3NT, and 4♠ all show balanced hands (3♦ and 3♥ are artificial steps).

With a bust balanced hand, Opener rebids 3♠, with 3NT as an asking relay. With a conentration of values in spades and another suit, 5-5 shape, Opener can make a "Picture Splinter" here. If he has a side suit (diamonds) with a stiff in the lower-ranking of the two other suits, he jumps to four of the side suit (4♦). That's wrong. If he has a stiff in the higher-ranking suit, he bids 3♣, which shows either a 5-5(higher stiff) or just any old sunbalanced hand that is not otherwise defined. Had Opener held A109xx in spades with a small stiff heart, he'd bid 3♣. In response to Opener's 3♦ inquiry, he'd bid 4♦, showing the same thing as a direct 4♦ but with the stiff in the higher ofn the remaining suits. Closer, but still not right.

So, Opener bids a simple 3♣, planning to just show the stiff. He can later cue hearts to show first-round control.

Responder will of course inquire, with 3♦. Opener has a stiff in the other major. As I currently play this, he will bid 3♥ to show that (first step). The new version is to bid the shortness in reverse order, with step one being the suoit right below trumps, the next step the suit two below trumps, and the third step (3NT) the remaining suit. Anyway, Opener bids 3♥.

Now, a cuebidding sequence starts. Ultimately, again, someone does not cuebid 4♣ and the other person signs off.

An interesting side note. Let's change South's hand to the ♠A109xx ♥x(x) ♦AQ109x ♣x(x) that I referred to earlier. Using the enhanced version, some nice things happen. If Opener shows a 5-5 COV with a stiff heart, Responder knows to sign off immediately, as neither of us has a club control.

If Responder had held Axxxx in hearts, instead of Kxxxx, then knowing of a club stiff would have helped a tad, but three diamond pitches will not take care of the fourth heart. However, after the 5-5 with a short club call (direct 4♦), you could use 4♥ as "LTTC," inferentially asking if the club shortness is a void, if you so desired. This way, 5-5's could include voids if space exists between the new suit and four of the agreed suit, space to bid "LTTC" as a de facto asking bid.

[mikeh]

1♠ 2N

Now:

1♠ was a stretch, but I bid it (and rebid 2♠ over a 2♥ response) because I will have trouble catching up if I pass... two suiters are difficult to show opposite a 3rd seat opening by partner, and I'd rather get in spades at the one-level than try to back in later if the opps bid.. but it is close.

As for North: I think 2N is clear. I am all for bidding 2♥ on most opening value 4=5=2=2 hands, but the hearts aren't good enough, the hand isn't good enough, and the spades rate to be too good... the J isn't wasted on the actual hand, but it will be wasted most of the time.

And I will NOT bid 2♥ then 4♠ as a picture bid, because of my diamond holding. KQxx AKJxx xx xx is a 2♥ 4♠ hand.

As to South: I play a version of J2NT where 4 of a lower suit shows a 5+ suit with a source of tricks... at least KJ9xx.. and obviously the diamond suit more than qualifies.. but the purpose of the bid is to allow partner to evaluate for slams: and I can see 5 compelling reasons why that is not a good path to travel if partner doesn't show enthusiasm first: 5 small trumps.

So I bid 3♠, showing a shitty hand with a stiff somewhere. Make my hand Axxxx Jx AQ10xx x and I'd bid 3♣... non-minimum with a stiff (or any huge hand).

Over 3♠, only a moron or someone interested in practicing methods would do anything but bid 4♠ signoff.... in the methods I am discussing, since it is impossible to construct a 3♠ hand that offers any play for slam.... we don't need much to bid 3♣..so 3♠ is a strong warning.. and North has..how many aces?

[whereagles]

mikeh, on Aug 2 2007, 12:06 AM, said:

I play a version of J2NT where 4 of a lower suit shows a 5+ suit with a source of tricks... at least KJ9xx.. and obviously the diamond suit more than qualifies.. but the purpose of the bid is to allow partner to evaluate for slams: and I can see 5 compelling reasons why that is not a good path to travel if partner doesn't show enthusiasm first: 5 small trumps.

So I bid 3♠, showing a shitty hand with a stiff somewhere.

Do you go to the 4 level on a min hand just because the suits are good? I don't think that's a good strategy... but then again, I don't think classic J2NT is a good support scheme anyway..

[mikeh]

whereagles, on Aug 1 2007, 11:14 PM, said:

mikeh, on Aug 2 2007, 12:06 AM, said:

I play a version of J2NT where 4 of a lower suit shows a 5+ suit with a source of tricks... at least KJ9xx.. and obviously the diamond suit more than qualifies.. but the purpose of the bid is to allow partner to evaluate for slams: and I can see 5 compelling reasons why that is not a good path to travel if partner doesn't show enthusiasm first: 5 small trumps.

So I bid 3♠, showing a shitty hand with a stiff somewhere.

Do you go to the 4 level on a min hand just because the suits are good? I don't think that's a good strategy... but then again, I don't think classic J2NT is a good support scheme anyway..

A hand with two good 5+ suits, in response to J2NT is, by definition, a non-minimum

[lowerline]

ralph23, on Aug 1 2007, 10:29 AM, said:

♣♦♥♠

Scoring: IMP

A hand from BBO....

---

Assuming you are NS and you play 2/1 and Jacoby 2nt (your favorite version thereof), how do you bid this hand ?

Why Jacoby?

1♠ - 2♦(1)
2♠(2) - 4♠

1: inv+ transfer
2: min 0-1♥

If you force me:

1♠ - 2NT(1)
3♣(2) - 4♠

1: inv+ 4crd fit
2: neutral

[Free]

2♦ as transfer is not standard 2/1, 2NT as inv+ is not J2NT,... Stop using your own systems if the system is CLEARLY described: std 2/1, J2NT in case you open 1♠. That's not hard, is it?

Simple hand for 2/1 imo:
pass - 1♥
1♠ - 2♠
4♠ - pass

[Robert]

Hi Free

Is it that hard to read the first post to get the instructions 'correct' before you rant and rave in 'error?' What did you think that "(your favorite version thereof)" meant if not non-standard 'versions were not welcomed.

Regards,
Robert

[hrothgar]

Robert, on Aug 2 2007, 03:37 PM, said:

Hi Free

Is it that hard to read the first post to get the instructions 'correct' before you rant and rave in 'error?'  What did you think that "(your favorite version thereof)" meant if not non-standard 'versions were not welcomed. 

Regards,
Robert

Personally, I would assume that the expression Jacoby 2NT response requires that the auction 1S - 2NT promises game forcing values. (Personally, I would be highly annoyed if a pickup partner claimed they were playing Jacoby 2NT but chose to make the bid with a 4 card limit raise)

As I read the original question, players are invited to use any one of a variety of different response structures following the game forcing 2NT bid.

For example, some folks might like the "traditional" response structure in which

3 level bids show shortage
4 level bids show 5-5 shape

Other might prefer a Bergen type structure.

[whereagles]

mikeh, on Aug 2 2007, 04:48 AM, said:

A hand with two good 5+ suits, in response to J2NT is, by definition, a non-minimum

So what do you do with a max 55 hand (say 3-4 losers) opposite J2NT?

I can imagine to simply use RKCB and, if the keys are all there, follow-up with 6 of the 2nd suit as a grand slam try. Is that it?

[Quantumcat]

If jacoby 2N can be invitational with four cards, what does 3♠ mean?? Doesn't that mean invitational with four cards too?

[Echognome]

Quantumcat, on Aug 2 2007, 05:15 AM, said:

If jacoby 2N can be invitational with four cards, what does 3♠ mean?? Doesn't that mean invitational with four cards too?

Nope. It means preemptive.

[mike777]

whereagles, on Aug 2 2007, 08:07 AM, said:

mikeh, on Aug 2 2007, 04:48 AM, said:

A hand with two good 5+ suits, in response to J2NT is, by definition, a non-minimum

So what do you do with a max 55 hand (say 3-4 losers) opposite J2NT?

I can imagine to simply use RKCB and, if the keys are all there, follow-up with 6 of the 2nd suit as a grand slam try. Is that it?

In Bergen:
1spade=2nt
3d=nonminimum two suiter or any good hand that is anxious to learn more about responder's distribution

Over 3d responder shows shortness:
3h=doubleton club
3s=doubleton diamond
3nt=doubleton heart
4c=nonmimimum 4x3
4d=stiff club and a hand too strong to splinter
4h=stiff d and a hand too strong to splinter
4s= a minimum 4x3

After this cuebids and for me kickback follow.

[mikeh]

whereagles, on Aug 2 2007, 08:07 AM, said:

mikeh, on Aug 2 2007, 04:48 AM, said:

A hand with two good 5+ suits, in response to J2NT is, by definition, a non-minimum

So what do you do with a max 55 hand (say 3-4 losers) opposite J2NT?

I can imagine to simply use RKCB and, if the keys are all there, follow-up with 6 of the 2nd suit as a grand slam try. Is that it?

it depends on the hand. I am not ducking the issue, but it truly depends on the hand. On some, I can bid 3♣, non-minimum with a stiff somewhere or any huge hand: responder usually relays via 3♦, and any rebid by opener beyond 3n shows a huge hand. On others, I can show my side suit at the 4-level and then keep going beyond game should partner signoff and on others I can keycard... but I am not a big keycard bidder... certainly nowhere near as often as it appears that most forum posters are.

And I can also show a void, via 3OM over 2N. And then keep bidding if appropriate.

As I say, it depends on the exact hand.

[ralph23]

The idea of 3♣ by opener to artificially show any "minimum" is interesting and I rather like it. A couple of people I believe suggested this method.

Q. Assuming that the partnership uses Bergen for non-GF responses to a major opening (and reserves J2NT for its traditional meaning of a GF major raise): Then, With a real dog opening hand (sub-par hand), opener can still jump to 4♠, even when using the artificial 3♣ "minimum" showing bid, yes ? Is there any other use for opener's jump to 4♠ over the Jac2NT bid? It takes up so much space, that it seems wrong to use it for any non-min hand.

So 3♣ by opener = minimum opening hand (however defined);

and a jump to 4♠ by opener = sub-minimum opening i.e "I'm embarrassed that I opened this hand"

Q2. Same question as before, but assuming you use 3♠ to show the "minimum" but non-dog hand (real dog getting the 4♠ jump). I believe this is the method suggested by mikeh... without starting religious wars , isn't this theoretically better than the 3♣ method, in that it saves more bidding space when opener has a non-minimum?

All ideas submitted are interesting and thought-provoking ... thanks.

[Free]

hrothgar, on Aug 2 2007, 01:55 PM, said:

Robert, on Aug 2 2007, 03:37 PM, said:

Hi Free

Is it that hard to read the first post to get the instructions 'correct' before you rant and rave in 'error?'  What did you think that "(your favorite version thereof)" meant if not non-standard 'versions were not welcomed. 

Regards,
Robert

Personally, I would assume that the expression Jacoby 2NT response requires that the auction 1S - 2NT promises game forcing values. (Personally, I would be highly annoyed if a pickup partner claimed they were playing Jacoby 2NT but chose to make the bid with a 4 card limit raise)

As I read the original question, players are invited to use any one of a variety of different response structures following the game forcing 2NT bid.

For example, some folks might like the "traditional" response structure in which

3 level bids show shortage
4 level bids show 5-5 shape

Other might prefer a Bergen type structure.

Exactly how I understand it.

Btw, 2NT as invite+ is Jordan 2NT, not Jacoby. These are not the same...

[blackshoe]

No, Jordan and Jacoby 2NT bids are not the same - but Jordan only applies in the specific auction 1M-(X)-?. If RHO passes, and you respond 2NT to show inv+ values, it's neither Jacoby nor Jordan. Unless you're Humpty Dumpty ("Words mean what I want them to mean, neither more nor less.")

[skjaeran]

What you refer to as Jacoby 2NT in ACBL (and mostly online) is called Stenberg in Scandinavia. Alvar Stenberg of Sweden invented this convention prior to Jacoby. Originally it showed a GF raise, these days it's often played as inv+. There's a lot of response schemes out there. Nobody over here play the standard Jacoby response scheme (maybe an exception for people who've been taught online by americans).

I play 2NT as a GF raise with my partner. Our responses are:
3♣= any minimum, 11-13(bad 14) =>3♦=relay
3♦= 14+, any singleton => 3♥=relay
3♥= bal 15-17 (6322/5422) =>3♠=relay
3♠= (13)14-16 any void =>3NT=relay
3NT= 18-19NT
4m= 17+, void
4M= 17+, void OM

(This scheme also works if 2NT is inv+, responder rebids 3M over 3♣ to sign off.)

[Robert]

Hi everyone

I disagree with hrothgar. My dictionary defines variant as, "an altered form of something." The poster asked for 2NT Jacoby or your favorite variant.

hrothgar is absolutely correct that he(and I) would never use a variant of any bid with a pick up partner. However, given the stated 'variant' in the post, after prior agreement with partner, the 2NT limit+ with 4 trumps or a GF raise is a variant that I do play with regular partners.

Hi Free What blackshoe said!

If you reread the first post, it uses the word variant(which means "an altered form"
If you want to complain, at least read the post correctly.

Jordan 2NT is used after 1MX as a raise in America since you changed the topic. If you use a variant, please state that you do so in your post. All bidders do not use the same mehtods, so 'if' the post does suggest 'variant' bidding, I will continue to feel free to post my variant type answers.

Regards,
Robert

[neilkaz]

skaeran, on Aug 5 2007, 07:41 AM, said:

What you refer to as Jacoby 2NT in ACBL (and mostly online) is called Stenberg in Scandinavia. Alvar Stenberg of Sweden invented this convention prior to Jacoby. Originally it showed a GF raise, these days it's often played as inv+. There's a lot of response schemes out there. Nobody over here play the standard Jacoby response scheme (maybe an exception for people who've been taught online by americans).

I play 2NT as a GF raise with my partner. Our responses are:
3♣= any minimum, 11-13(bad 14) =>3♦=relay
3♦= 14+, any singleton => 3♥=relay
3♥= bal 15-17 (6322/5422) =>3♠=relay
3♠= (13)14-16 any void =>3NT=relay
3NT= 18-19NT
4m= 17+, void
4M= 17+, void OM

(This scheme also works if 2NT is inv+, responder rebids 3M over 3♣ to sign off.)

I love it..much better than the awful "SA" responses to J2NT. Is there a web site explaining further continuations after the relays ? I looked but couldn't find exactly what I was looking for and found some different responses to Stenberg as well.

TY .. neilkaz ..

[keylime]

I open 1S happily in South:

1S - 2H
2S* (any minimum) - 3S (minimum)
4S

or if I wanted to completely suppress the heart (I wouldn't):

1S - 2NT* (how many losers?) ((what Larry and I use))
3D* (six of them) - 4S

or:

1S - 2NT* (LR or better) ((Swedish 2NT))
3C* (any minimum) - 4S