[andy_h]

Upon discussing some system stuff with a fellow european, it now made me wonder.

Using 1M-2NT or whichever bid is your strong major raise (let's assume it's GF rather than inv+) why do you play it as 4card raise and not 3card raise since responder is usually the one doing the asking and opener showing his shape/strength? The 4 card does help when you've established a 6-4 fit (opener can show the Q in response to keycard) but if you can do it with 3 cards, it can help your 2/1 GF auctions in case 4th seat preempts and you have not promised support yet.

What do you think?

[karlson]

If you have a 3-card raise, it's more likely that you have a side suit to show with a 2/1, which rates to be useful information?

[Jlall]

The most obvious reason is with only 3 trumps you are not ready to set trumps yet, and with 4 you are. Even if I'm like 3334 I could easily want to be in clubs. You could play 2N as 3+ and then dedicate bids to later finding a secondary fit, but obviously you'd rather have started with 2C in that case.

It is because you have already found a 5-4 fit that you can immediately start with shortness showing followed by cuebidding, and establishing that so that you can get to the core issues immediately is why it is worth it to start the bidding at such a high level as opposed to starting with 2C.

[CSGibson]

playing a limited opening precision style I use 2N as a forcing raise with 3 card support if partner's shortness appears to be the primary information I need for slam.

[Codo]

Two years ago I switched to 3 card Jacoby. I have no bad experiences yet.

But we play 2 NT as a real strong hand, so 15+. Maybe, if it is "just"" game forcing, you may get more troubles.

[peachy]

Codo, on Jan 29 2010, 02:26 AM, said:

Two years ago I switched to 3 card Jacoby. I have no bad experiences yet.

But we play 2 NT as a real strong hand, so 15+. Maybe, if it is "just"" game forcing, you may get more troubles.

If you play Jacoby 2NT as "real strong hand" then IMO you should not call it Jacoby, it is sufficiently much modified to no longer be same as Jacoby, just like 2NT as "invit or better raise" is.

[P_Marlowe]

peachy, on Jan 29 2010, 02:54 AM, said:

Codo, on Jan 29 2010, 02:26 AM, said:

Two years ago I switched to 3 card Jacoby. I have no bad experiences yet.

But we play 2 NT as a real strong hand, so 15+. Maybe, if it is "just"" game forcing, you may get more troubles.

If you play Jacoby 2NT as "real strong hand" then IMO you should not call it Jacoby, it is sufficiently much modified to no longer be same as Jacoby, just like 2NT as "invit or better raise" is.

Rant Start (Nothing personal):
Whats is in a name? Sry, as always it comes down, how do you alert 2NT.

I call it Jacoby, because I can easier remember it, of course if I alert the thing,
I will mention, that the bid is just fit showing (i.e. +3) and GF, although our GF
hands start with alower ranger than +15.
If you alert the thing and say "Jacoby" and believe you did the job of explaining
the bid, you may be right in NA, but you wont be right in other areas of world.
Rant End

For whats it worth: our experience using 2NT this way is, that it works, and the
whole thread should focus on discussing the pros and cons of such a style.

Peoble, who like to play 2NT as a 4 card raise, quite often include strong bal.
3 card raises in a 2C response to 1M, this allowes them to keep 2NT "clean",
but they make 2C a little more "unclean".

The advantage of going via 2NT is that setting the trump suit simplifies a lot of
your auctions, the disadvantage is, that you give up finding a better fit in a other
suit, and to a certain degree you also loose some space.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[gnasher]

andy_h, on Jan 29 2010, 01:59 AM, said:

since responder is usually the one doing the asking and opener showing his shape/strength

I don't agree with this philosophy at all. Good slam auctions usually involve an exchange of information. An often vital piece of information is whether we have a nine-card fit, because it helps opener to picture what will happen to his losers.

[helene_t]

Jacoby 2NT asks for shortness. I suppose if 2NT shows 3-card support it asks for a second suit. So not only is the point range and the degree of fit different from Jacoby, the follow-ups are probably different as well.

Oh well, calling a 2♣ response to 1NT "stayman" can mean almost anything so I suppose the same is true for Jacoby in some circles. In the Netherlands, lots of people call a 2NT raise "Truscott" (or sometimes: "Truscott without dbl" because Truscott only applies over a double). I have no idea what, if anything, that adds to simply "good hand with support".

[Codo]

gnasher, on Jan 29 2010, 08:26 PM, said:

andy_h, on Jan 29 2010, 01:59 AM, said:

since responder is usually the one doing the asking and opener showing his shape/strength

I don't agree with this philosophy at all. Good slam auctions usually involve an exchange of information. An often vital piece of information is whether we have a nine-card fit, because it helps opener to picture what will happen to his losers.

In this case you should put all strong hands in a 1♠ response to have as much space as possible for both players to describe their hand.

I do not know how your typical 1 M 2 NT auction looks like, but in mine, responder more often then not asks and opener responds. This may be theoretically bad- but it is the way it works normally. And it is responder who can see where the losers are going.

[Apollo81]

What Justin said: with only 3-card support, you're not ready to set trumps yet.

[jjbrr]

I think bidding slams with 8-card fits requires a lot more judgment than bidding those with 9-card fits. Don't make the easy slams harder to bid.

[dake50]

From where ya'all start this sounds needed agreement/discussion.
I cut my teeth on Swiss raises (not just 4C/4D artificial, but 24 paths 1S to 4S, 28 from 1H to 4H - give the different paths different nuances ..THEN.. -you do the cases!)

[andy_h]

I guess this type of method is more geared towards handling preemptions so opener will know if there is a fit or not, but that's probably way less frequent (for 4th seat to come in over a 2/1 GF auction) than for us exploring the right contract.

Gnasher, what I meant about that sentence was usually over Jacoby or whatever it is, don't you normally have opener to show any minimum/shortages/5-5 etc and thereafter exchange cuebids? That's all I meant for the part about asking/showing since responder will often be balanced and will hear information from opener.

[gnasher]

andy_h, on Jan 29 2010, 05:28 PM, said:

Gnasher, what I meant about that sentence was usually over Jacoby or whatever it is, don't you normally have opener to show any minimum/shortages/5-5 etc and thereafter exchange cuebids? That's all I meant for the part about asking/showing since responder will often be balanced and will hear information from opener.

Yes, I do, but (as you imply) thereafter it's a dialogue. Opener often has to judge whether to show extras, whether to go past game, etc.

Suppose that you show your shortage, and then responder partner cue-bids a suit where you have KJxx. If that's opposite four-card support, it's 0-1 losers. If it's opposite 3-card support, it's 0-2 losers, depending on how many he has and whether you can ruff the loser(s) safely.