[mcphee]

Responding 1H is why you were given that suit to bid. It is not your fault you have a weak hand, not your fault if partner does not know what a j/s looks like, which is GF. I am delighted to see that my 1H bid (as some may pass which is silly imo) is getting us to a game.

I also like the 2NT toy, although many do not play this after a j/s, to help define my response. BTW I can construct hands on the weak side of a j/s that will make 12 tricks, AKxx Ax AKxxxx x one such example needs 2-2 trumps and K king onside. I am laughing at those who feel pass is the right action.

[Jlall]

kenrexford, on Jan 25 2010, 06:55 AM, said:

The 2NT bid (if conventional) does not have a sole purpose of stopping in a partscore. It also has the benefit of distinguishing a values 3♦ from a crud 3♦, both below 3NT, and the same for spade raises, etc.

Wrongsiding 3N is a pretty huge downside.

[kenrexford]

Jlall, on Jan 25 2010, 11:00 AM, said:

kenrexford, on Jan 25 2010, 06:55 AM, said:

The 2NT bid (if conventional) does not have a sole purpose of stopping in a partscore.  It also has the benefit of distinguishing a values 3♦ from a crud 3♦, both below 3NT, and the same for spade raises, etc.

Wrongsiding 3N is a pretty huge downside.

I thought about that, but I think this is illusory. Here's why.

Responder is also allowed to think. He will only bid 2NT when he intends on raising diamonds or spades. If Responder wants to transfer 3NT to Opener, he can bid 3♣.

On this hand, I'm not sure that the right-siding is a concern. If Opener has a reasonably-expected 4-1-5-3 hand, where 3NT is in play, I as Responder want the lead. Qx in hearts opposite Kxx, for example, seems right-sided when the Qx holding declares. Plus, with QJxxx in hearts, opposite a hypo heart stiff, I'd rather receive the lead than be forced to pop Jack when the lead goes through hearts.

Sure, with some weak hands I might be forced to bid 3♣ to right-side 3NT. But, I can live with that.

Also, I agree that this reduces the utility of a 2NT call to hands with lead tolerance in the unbid suit and weak, or no intention of leaving the contract in 3NT, but I think this happens enough.

On a different note, I personally don't like the requirement that a jump shift to the two-level be 100% GF, actually. This only occurs in four auctions: 1♣-1♦-2♥, 1♣-1♦-2♠, 1♣-1♥-2♠, and 1♦-1♥-2♠. In all four, I'd actually rather have the two-level jump shift treated as almost game force. The primary reason is that a one-up response (1♦-1♦ or 1♦-1♥) is a call that I often make (by agreement) as a semi-Herbert call (might be three-card on occasion and might be VERY light). That general agreement suggests the need for the 2NT relay (or possibly 1♣-1♦-2♥-2♠ as ING.). For those who would pass 1♦ and now see a problem, this illustrates the reason. As a person who I would guess also bids when in doubt, "in doubt" being quite shocking to others, I bet you can at least understand my reasoning.