[ArcLight]

I see "Weak Jump Shifts" advocated by Marty Bergen and in "Modern Bridge Conventions" by Bill Root. Mike Lawrence and Max Hardy recommending "Strong Jump Shifts".

SJS are great when they come up, but are rare.
WJS are more frequent.

Since SJS help for slams they seem less useful for MPs, and more useful for IMPs. The reverse is true for WJS, their frequency may be useful for MPs.

What do experts use? Why?

[the hog]

Both, depending which one fits in best with the rest of the system being played. You cannot pick one bid in isolation and asks its worth; you need to look at the system as a whole.

[EricK]

The Hog is of course right about looking at the whole system.

But another point is that SJS are only as rare as you let them be. In the original Acol style, for example, a SJS simply said we have at least a game here and there may be a slam if you are suitable. But many current styles demand a solid or near solid suit and extra points and no second suit and so on and so forth. Obviously, the former type of SJS came up much more frequently than the latter.

If you are playing 2/1 GF you do not need SJS at the 3 level. If you are not, then I recommend keeping SJS to the 3 level as very well defined as they take up a lot of room (especially something like 1♠ 3♥).

SJS at the 2 level are another matter. You can quite easily allow them on a fairly wide range of hands and still have the room to sort everything out. They offer the same advantages as other 2/1 responses in a 2/1 GF system. i.e. you have forced to game at a reasonably low level and both sides can make descriptive bids without worrying about being dropped short of game.

I realise that this is not a standard recommendation, but I have never seen a good reason given for this. Certainly it makes for "cleaner" auctions than having to go through 4SF or NMF or Bourke relay or other such gadgets.

Eric

[Double !]

The_Hog, on Aug 13 2005, 09:40 PM, said:

Both, depending which one fits in best with the rest of the system being played. You cannot pick one bid in isolation and asks its worth; you need to look at the system as a whole.

I agree. system-dependent.

If playing WJO, I play them disciplined, about 3-7, so simple rebid is constructive and jump is forcing. Many 2/1 players seem to be looking at J-S being invitational. This can be awkward for some hands like an invitational 4M-6m hand. My personal preference is for J-S to be 2-way: either fit-bids and/or strong old fashioned J-S over 1m if not playing reverse flannery. (I also play 2/1 GF except for suit rebid, something that makes some forum members have violent negative physical reactions). There just seem to be certain hands that come up where I prefer to get the hand "off my chest" first (create the forcing situation with extras) and then slow down if need be. Jurassic period bidding.

[Echognome]

Adding yet another agreement for the rest of your system being important. Also, you may vary your treatment over majors and minors.

We play strong jump shifts over our loose minor opening, but... since we have specific ranges for preempts, after we've passed it becomes a weak jump shift "out of range" so to speak.

[awm]

In terms of popularity among expert players, intermediate jump shifts seem to be gaining. Especially over 1M, I see a lot of people playing jumps as natural and invitational (like 9-11 with a good suit). The other frequent option is using jumps as raises in various ways.

Over minor suits, I see a fair number of people playing reverse flannery and variants (1m-2♥ shows 5+♠ and 4+♥ weak, 1m-2♠ same thing invitational). Another popular treatment involves using jumps as raises and/or to show the balanced invite (i.e. 1♦-2♥ is either a game forcing diamond raise or an invitational 2NT bid).

Honestly I don't see that many elite partnerships using either strong or weak jumps these days!

[Chamaco]

ArcLight, on Aug 14 2005, 02:12 AM, said:

I see "Weak Jump Shifts" advocated by Marty Bergen and in "Modern Bridge Conventions" by Bill Root. Mike Lawrence and Max Hardy recommending "Strong Jump Shifts".

SJS are great when they come up, but are rare.
WJS are more frequent.

Since SJS help for slams they seem less useful for MPs, and more useful for IMPs. The reverse is true for WJS, their frequency may be useful for MPs.

What do experts use? Why?

As others pointed out, there are many other treatments, and the alternatives change from major or minor suit openings.

Over 1m opening it is quite frequent to see 1m-2H/2S as promising Flannery or Reverse Flannery handtypes (54 or 45 in majors) in majors, with various ranges.

Over 1M opening, fitshowing jumps or minisplinters are also popular, besides natural invitational JS and other systems of raises.

[coyot]

As to the frequency of various SJS types:
The ones with a good suit are less frequent and more useful. If you know what the trumps will be, it is a good idea to get this to partner quickly. If your suit is not good enough to play against void or singleton, you don't need SJS to bid it

(I see this as the only advantage of SJS - setting trumps early. If I ever play SJS, I will want it to promise a good suit.)

[Free]

I prefer transfer jump shifts over 1m openings:

1m-?

2♦ = 6+♥, weak OR GF
2♥ = 6+♠, weak OR GF

This also helps in other bidding situations, where you rebid your Major.

Only problem you have: 1♦-2♦ is no longer available to show support... Just use something else

[Winstonm]

As Ron said well: system dictates which is better. Let me add that no matter which method is utilized precise definition of the hand is imperative - the more room a bid takes the more precise the definition of that hand should be as there is precious little room left to ask, so the opposite hand needs to have a very good idea of what hand you hold.

If Weak Jump Shifts are used, the questions to ask are: what is the range? what should the suit look like? would either change with vulnerability? is a minor WJS the same hand as a major WJS? And there are many others.

Pick what fits the system and then determine with partner the stipulations regarding that bid and then be a good partner and don't deviate on whim - especially in team events.

Winston

[pclayton]

We have cut out all weak jump shifts in our system. The last stand for WJS was 1 minor - double - 2 major, but we've made these as fitted,

Over a major, a js is some sort of raise and over a minor, a js is either rev flannery or a limit raise.

I don't miss either wjs or sjs. A few pairs play 2 way js where a js is either some sort of raise or a jump shift in a certain suit. This has merit to me, but I haven't looked at it that closely.

[POJC]

I like WJS a lot. In my opinion I can easily manage without SJS, its to rare and i use up my biding room. It always was a good practice to bid slowly with points, so i don't see the reason for the SJS.
When i play WJS i get an additional benefit which is when i rebid my suit as responder. Eg. 1C-1H,1S-2H=8-11/3H=GF. This sames me room when having a good hand and still lets me get some further info on Ps hand.
So in addition to acting as a preempt it also improves my offensive biding when i have a good hand.

[luke warm]

i don't use either over majors... any j/s is either a limit raise splinter, a strong splinter, or a variable strength bid showing 4+ support

over minors, 1c/2d is reverse flannery, 1d/2h the same, 1c/2h(2s) and 1d/2s are weak

[Double !]

pclayton, on Aug 14 2005, 11:29 AM, said:

A few pairs play 2 way js where a js is either some sort of raise or a jump shift in a certain suit. This has merit to me, but I haven't looked at it that closely.

I like this 2-way bid. We play that the next step is simply asking P whether the J-S was an invitational fit-bid or a Strong J-S. If both, first confirm the strength. Various ways to do this such as by using the next 3 steps to distinguish.

[Gerben42]

At the 2-level WJS. At the 3-level, depends on what the rest of your system looks like. I use it as fit-showing bids. I have described the how and why of Weak Jump Shifts to the 2-level here:

Weak Jump Shifts

[Al_U_Card]

awm, on Aug 14 2005, 02:06 AM, said:

In terms of popularity among expert players, intermediate jump shifts seem to be gaining. Especially over 1M, I see a lot of people playing jumps as natural and invitational (like 9-11 with a good suit). The other frequent option is using jumps as raises in various ways.

Over minor suits, I see a fair number of people playing reverse flannery and variants (1m-2♥ shows 5+♠ and 4+♥ weak, 1m-2♠ same thing invitational). Another popular treatment involves using jumps as raises and/or to show the balanced invite (i.e. 1♦-2♥ is either a game forcing diamond raise or an invitational 2NT bid).

Honestly I don't see that many elite partnerships using either strong or weak jumps these days!

Indeed, every inch of bidding space must be used to the max. Using CBS or xyz, the use of CJS to show major suit holdings for weak hands has a lot to recommend it. (I use it myself.) The tenet of weak hands hi-jacking the opps bidding space tends to favour WJS, but even 3C or 3D only just get in the way and even then not too much.

[Fluffy]

EricK, on Aug 14 2005, 05:06 AM, said:

But another point is that SJS are only as rare as you let them be. In the original Acol style, for example, a SJS simply said we have at least a game here and there may be a slam if you are suitable. But many current styles demand a solid or near solid suit and extra points and no second suit and so on and so forth. Obviously, the former type of SJS came up much more frequently than the latter.

There is a point where you make SJS frequent, and it begins to preempt yourself, that's why the few who play it, play it ultra-solid.

In my system I play a wide variety conventions for jumps at the 2/3 level, but most of them are WJS. They don't come very frequently either.