[whereagles]

flytoox, on Apr 5 2005, 06:52 PM, said:

Does it hurt to explore the slam possibility? What is the point of preempting pd with 4H? What if pd DOES have DAK and CAK? How do you plan to explain to pd?

4H bid sound more like a hand with X,KQJTxxx,xxx,Ax. If you bid 4H with so wide range pd will find it difficult what to do.

Even if pd has sth like x, xxx,AKxxx,Kxxx, slam has very good chance. Pd could have a much better hand.)

It can hurt, yes. Suppose it goes

1D pa 1H 2/3C
pa 5C ??

There. Are you happy with the way things deveolped? You're taking the last guess here. If it had gone

1D pa 4H ??

now it would be LHO who had to take the last guess, as whether to bid 5C all by himself or not. And even if he did guess to bid 5C, pard would know to double or bid 5H in at least some ocasions.

Remember: 1D is precision. Opener is limited and has no authority whatsoever to bid above a straight 4H shut out bid. If his RHO passes, opener doesn't have to do or guess anything, he only has to pass.

As for the hands, with AQx AKQJxx xx xx I wouldn't bid a straight 4H, but I think 4H it's a perfectly acceptable tactical bid. I would bid 1D-1H because I think the likelyhood of getting preempted (I have AQx of spades after all) does not compensate for the chances of finding a slam if pard is max. Still, if before bidding 1H I took a peek at LHO and realized he was aching to bid, I would DEFINITELY bid a straight 4H and double whatever he tried.

With x KQJTxxx xxx Ax a straight 4H is obvious. In fact, if a player doesn't bid 4H on this one he should urgently read a book on precision, because bidding 1D-1H reveals serious difficulties in understanding the concept of a limited opener. (Sorry heartA, but that's just the way it is.

[joker_gib]

As you point it out, this is difficult when opps preempt but it will become impossible if even you, you prempt your partner !

I know that playing precision, this bid is limited but only to 16- (I don't play precision so tell me if I'm wrong).

There are a lot of weaker hands that can provide slam so I simply can't understand the 4♥ bid.

That's all I wanted to say !

Alain

[Chamaco]

whereagles, on Apr 6 2005, 07:57 AM, said:

flytoox, on Apr 5 2005, 06:52 PM, said:

Does it hurt to explore the slam possibility? What is the point of preempting pd with 4H? What if pd DOES have DAK and CAK? How do you plan to explain to pd?

4H bid sound more like a hand with X,KQJTxxx,xxx,Ax. If you bid 4H with so wide range pd will find it difficult what to do.

Even if pd has sth like x, xxx,AKxxx,Kxxx, slam has very good chance. Pd could have a much better hand.)

It can hurt, yes. Suppose it goes

1D pa 1H 2/3C
pa 5C ??

There. Are you happy with the way things deveolped? You're taking the last guess here.

That's one more reason why I love strong Jumpshifts.

Here it goes:

1D-p-2H

and here, regardless of opps preempt, opener's side ahas a clearer picture than overcaller's side: opener knows responder has a 5 losers or better hand with good hearts and responder knows opener is limited.
The combined potential of the hands is easier to evaluate than after an ambiguous, "normal" 1-over-1 response.

[whereagles]

Hum.. strong jump shifts are also midly preemptive. You better have a very well defined hand pattern when you do them, otherwise you're just messing yourself up

[Chamaco]

whereagles, on Apr 6 2005, 08:42 AM, said:

Hum.. strong jump shifts are also midly preemptive. You better have a very well defined hand pattern when you do them, otherwise you're just messing yourself up

They sure have to be disciplined:
I use them as strong single suiter (selfsufficient opposite a void) max 5-5.5 losers OR 18+ semibalanced with good 5+ suit (3 of top 5 honors).

This is inherited from Mike Lawrence 2/1 (we dropped the 2 suiter JS - e.g. strong suit + strong support for pd - because in Precision 1D does not guarantee diamond, it can be 13-15 bal in our case).
Actually, responding to a Precision opener, I am thinking of excluding the 18+ semibalanced hand from the JS (very little risk if we start the auction by simply responding 1M).

I have to say that using the strong JS in a disciplined manner rarely has preempted our side, and is actually extremely useful for
- slam exploration from a lower level (easier to set trumps and start cue at 3 level)
- bidding distributional hand without jumping to 4M right away: you are better placed if opps save, and you won't need to take the last guess.

As a matter of fact, with a strong distributional hand, the strong JS tends to SAVE space rather than lose bidding space, because with most standard tools, responder is rarely able to set his trump suit below the 3 level.

You lose weak jumpshifts, but it's a price I am willing to pay if playing teams; losing "Reversed Flannery" 2M responses is somewhat more annoying, but again, the frequency/magnitude of the negative impact is acceptable.

[whereagles]

Well, SJS might indeed save space, but there are trade-offs

A.
1D 1H
1S 2C (4th suit)
2NT 3H = 6 cards GF

B.
1D 2H

In A you're 1 level higher, but you already know pard has a min with 44 or 54 diam/spade.
In B you're 1 level lower, but opener will have a harder time describing his hand with a max (even playing precision)

[Chamaco]

Quote

A.
1D 1H
1S 2C (4th suit)
2NT 3H = 6 cards GF

Yes but it says nothing of the quality of your suit.
In this sequence 3H strongly suggests H, but pard can retreat to 3NT, and when you have, say, KQJT98x, all you want is starting cues at thelowest level possible.

Going via 4sf with slammish 1suited hands just leads to awkward auctions most of the times, because it does not guarantees the suit quality.

Quote

B.
1D 2H

In A you're 1 level higher, but you already know pard has a min with 44 or 54 diam/spade.
In B you're 1 level lower, but opener will have a harder time describing his hand with a max (even playing precision)

In most hands suited for SJS, you are mostly worried about sidesuit controls, not shape of opener.
Typically, SJS has a void or singleton, and would like simply to check a critical suit before asking keycards.
Actually, a case can be made to allow for CABs by responder or control responses by opener.

[whereagles]

I see your point. SJS do indeed make your life easier when used properly Still, I prefer to play weak jump shifts because..

1. They come up much more often
2. Put tremendous pressure on 4th player

Point 2 is interesting. Playing precision the pressure is much less because opener is limited and will be much more reluctant to double for penalties. Thus I seem to be arriving at the conclusion that WJS are not that important in precision. But more thought would have to be given to this matter.

[Chamaco]

whereagles, on Apr 6 2005, 09:58 AM, said:

I see your point. SJS do indeed make your life easier when used properly Still, I prefer to play weak jump shifts because..

1. They come up much more often
2. Put tremendous pressure on 4th player

Point 2 is interesting. Playing precision the pressure is much less because opener is limited and will be much more reluctant to double for penalties. Thus I seem to be arriving at the conclusion that WJS are not that important in precision. But more thought would have to be given to this matter.

The idea that of privileging destructive bidding to constructive is, IMO, cetainly sounder at MP.
I value the ease of slam bidding a big plus in team matches, so the form of scoring might pull its weight.

Now, to discuss your point, e.g. WJS in a 2/1-based scheme vs WJS in a limited-opener schme such as Precision.

1. it depends whether JS are defined as "REALLY weak" or "intermediate".
In my textbooks on 2/1 or SAYC, a "really weak" JS is defined as a long 1-suited with no defensive tricks:
Hand 1: JTxxxx-xxx-Qxx-x is about par for such a WJS.

Hand 2: QJTxxx-Kxx-xxx-x is already too strong for a WJS, according to such criterion, because, in a 2/1 scheme, opener can still hold a big hand, so the first hand is a danger signal to opener if he holds a big hand without fit.

The same does not hold true in a precision context: in Precision, Weak JS can be stronger than hand 1, because opener is limited.

Before moving to Precision, I had agreed REALLY WEAK JS (see hand 1) over opener. However, in 2.5 years, they never came up.
In the meantime, a significant number of hands suitable for SJS came up.

So, I'd say that , in the comparison SJS vs REALLY WEAK JS, SJS wins even in frequency of occurrence.

-------------------------------------

A totally different bird is the intermediate/"weakish" JS.
This makes more sense when responding to a limited opener, especially if they are wide range (0-7 hcp, at least 9 losers) or so.
These certainly put much presure, and they are more frequent than the yarborough JS.

Still, I value SJS more (at least at teams), just a matter of tastes I guess

[mr1303]

Last time I made a strong jump shift was in a £1 rubber bridge game.

I held:

KJx
Kx
A
AKQxxxx

and partner opened 1H. The auction continued

1H 3C
3D 4C
P

I threw my cards at him. When I picked them up again I claimed 13 tricks at trick 3 (won opening lead, all followed to 2 rounds of trumps)

[Chamaco]

mr1303, on Apr 6 2005, 10:17 AM, said:

Last time I made a strong jump shift was in a £1 rubber bridge game.

If you use as criterion a 5-5.5 losers hand with self sufficient suit, you'll find it comes up more often.

You can use SJS with:

KQT9xxx-AQx-x-Ax

15 hcp but 4.5 losers, and the hand can be 1 losers weaker than this one.

E.g.
AQJTxxxx-xx-A-xx
11 hcp but 4.5 losers
(and in fact it's easy to see how, even a misfit hand can have slam if pard has anything resembling an opener)


Do not use hcp but losers+ suit quality for SJS definition: SJS will be well-defined anyways, but they'll come up more often.

BTW: I use SJS only at the 2 level (in a major). The SJS-type hand in a minor is shown by biding 4m over pard's likely 3NT bid.

[whereagles]

Yeah, indeed WJS are theoretically made on total rubbish. You do have a point that real rubbish comes up about as often as a good hand. I "solved" this by requiring WJS = good suit, at most a queen outside. Can be as low QJ9xxx or JTxxxxx, or as high as KQJTxx (AQJxxx if playing precision). I guess this qualifies as intermediate in your definitions

[Gerben42]

This is my big problem with Rubber Bridge. People might have a different idea about the bidding system (like in the example where partner passed 4♣) and you can't afford things like that. It's already expensive enough with all my own and partner's normal mistakes.

I've only played rubber with people I know so at least I know what they play, avoiding this problem. How do people cope with this?

[Walddk]

mr1303, on Apr 6 2005, 05:17 AM, said:

I threw my cards at him.

You are kidding, are you not?

Roland

[mr1303]

The idea seems to be that only ultra simple systems are allowed, so there aren't misunderstandings on conventions. Whether partner will pass what to you is a 100% forcing auction however, is the luck of the draw.

Things like negative doubles aren't allowed, apparantly they're too complicated. So you end up saying at the start of the rubber something like

"Strong, stayman twice and double"

Which means Strong (15-17) NT, stayman 2C and 3C after 1 or 2NT, and double as take-out to pre-empts. You can use Baron instead, but thats it. You can also play Fishbien or however it's spelt to pre-empts, but absolutely no-one wants to.

Acol 2s are the only 2 level bids allowed (at least in the UK), and we're forced to play 4 card majors (yuck) as well.

[Fluffy]

Walddk, on Apr 6 2005, 12:01 PM, said:

mr1303, on Apr 6 2005, 05:17 AM, said:

I threw my cards at him.

You are kidding, are you not?

Roland

Why not? :-P, I wouldn't be surprised to see that once in my life, specially when you are losing money for it.

I've seen throwing 1 card to fly all over (partner leading singleton trump against 7, and the other 'throwing' his trump Q on first trick).