[kenrexford]

If the ACBL banned Jacoby 2NT for some reason, but anything else within reason was allowed, what would you prefer that 2NT mean?

I thought about things like...

1. Unknown mini-splinter
2. Immediate 3-card limit raise
3. Minors
4. Balanced
5. One-suited weak minor

I even played for a while (and loved it) that 1S-P-2NT showed a GF hand with 5+ hearts and no spade fit (such that 1S-P-2H was constructive but passable).

Any ideas?

[mohitz]

Would prefer both minors invitational. There is no real way to bid such hands playing 2/1.

[kfay]

Balanced GF, wtp?

[karlson]

Having played 2n balanced GF for a little while, I really don't like it. It just seems like there's a ton of guessing about whether to bid 3N or 4M and you don't really have room to both sort out stoppers and show some slam interest. For me those auctions start much better with 2♣. So I guess I would play 2♣ as balanced GF, possibly with 4M, and 2n as either weak or GF with single-suited clubs? I bet Ken approves.

[the hog]

Balanced GF for me also. You have various responses you can play over this - either showing a s/t or void, or else bid a 4 card second suit. You aill only be at the 3 level, not 4 level.

[mich-b]

kenrexford, on Jun 8 2010, 11:45 PM, said:

If the ACBL banned Jacoby 2NT for some reason, but anything else within reason was allowed, what would you prefer that 2NT mean?

I thought about things like...

1. Unknown mini-splinter
2. Immediate 3-card limit raise
3. Minors
4. Balanced
5. One-suited weak minor

I even played for a while (and loved it) that 1S-P-2NT showed a GF hand with 5+ hearts and no spade fit (such that 1S-P-2H was constructive but passable).

Any ideas?

I quite like
2. Immediate 3-card limit raise

unless my system includes those hands in a 2♣ response , so to be able to play those hands in 2M , when opener rejects the invite. I think some Italians had this feature in their system (2♣ = GF relay or 3 card invite).

Removing the 3 card invite from the 1NT response , makes it much easier to play it as semi forcing (ok, non-forcing..) and opener can pass 1NT with a 5332 minimum , without worrying about responder having some 3154 9-10p.

[jjbrr]

any answer except natural is hopless

[cherdanno]

jjbrr, on Jun 9 2010, 02:42 AM, said:

any answer except natural is hopless

LOL

[gwnn]

Natural signoff.

[Free]

Jordan 2NT...

[hanp]

jjbrr, on Jun 9 2010, 02:42 AM, said:

any answer except natural is hopless

LOL

[Cascade]

jjbrr, on Jun 9 2010, 07:42 PM, said:

any answer except natural is hopless

Where do you need to hop to?

[mohitz]

gwnn, on Jun 9 2010, 01:56 PM, said:

Natural signoff.

I like this!

[whereagles]

natural is ok, though I'd prefer something like a NF 11-12 flattish raise.

[Bende]

I would prefer balanced game force.

[RichMor]

First choice; very strong and balanced, like the old Baron 2NT. Good for slam bidding and limits other sequences.

Second choice; mystery mini splinter.

RichM

[Phil]

kfay, on Jun 9 2010, 12:16 AM, said:

Balanced GF, wtp?

Yeah LOL. Kind of like what I play now?

[kenrexford]

I was thinking about this recently, and I think I personally am inclined toward the mystery mini-splinter if the opening is spades (with possibly some other riders meanings), but an immediate limit raise if the opening is hearts, because the heart auction mystery mini-splinter is cramped for space anyway, and because 1H-P-1NT-P-??? is a tough sequence when Opener has 4522.

[Phil]

As an alternative to natural, I like the idea of compressing mini-splinters into 1♥ - 2♠ and 1♠ - 2N. You could then keep the 1M - 3x as invitational.

[eyhung]

With my partner Joel Hoersch, I play "Joelcoby" -- 2NT promises 3-card support (could be more) and a balanced hand. Opener rebids show shape (bal/unbal) and strength and responder has relays available to identify the best game (or slam). I like it, it's definitely superior to standard Jacoby for choice-of-games auctions, but it's not easy to remember all the followups.