[awm]

Elianna and I play a fairly natural system with a bunch of extra gadgets. We use five-card majors and a strong notrump, so our minor suit openings can be three cards, and are often a weak notrump hand. We don't open particularly light in the minor suits, so minimum 12 hcp if balanced (actually we pass some bad twelves), 11 or occasionally 10 hcp with a long minor suit.

Our style is to bid up the line in one-level auctions. We rebid 1NT on a singleton when in range in preference to rebidding a five-card minor or showing both minors in a 4441 hand, and we raise partner's 1M response often on three-card support. We play 2-way nmf over 1NT rebids.

Anyway, it's not clear how much any of this is relevant. The poll is about the best treatment for a jump-shift into two of a major (opponents passing).

[gwnn]

a tie between reverse flannery and fit jump (forcing and non-forcing, promising 5M4m) for me.

[lmilne]

I was shown the system of 1m-2M being 8-11, 6 card suit a while ago, and instantly preferred it to the normal weak jump shift. It now frees up the 1m-1M-2m-3M sequences as natural, game-forcing instead of the normal invitational meaning.

Also, jumping with 2-5 HCP seems kind of horrible on a lot of hands. I can understand the point of bidding 2S on KJTxxx xx xxx xx over 1C, but most hands in that range aren't this good. I'm not generally a big fan of preempting in a new suit after we open the bidding in general, so take that for what it's worth.

Over 1m-2M, I like to play the same inquiry responses as over a weak 2 opening, as the ranges and handtypes are quite similar. For me, that means 1m-2H-2S is an artificial inquiry, as is 1m-2S-2NT. After that, we can find strength and shortage. Seems to be reasonably accurate.

Hope this helps.

[hrothgar]

I know that this is going to sound terrible dated, but I am a big proponent of strong jump shifts over minor suit openings.

I prefer the Soloway style, in which the SJS shows either

1. A self sufficient suit
2. A NT oriented hand
3. A suit + a fit for partner's minor

[jdonn]

1st choice: Natural and strong (Socal style), but 2♥ can also be invitational balanced. Opener asks about hand with next bid up, and responder bids 2NT over 2♠ on the invitational hand, otherwise 3♣+ on the strong hands to show support/single suited/shortness/balanced etc.

That way you get a direct 2NT response as game forcing, which we all know is very good to have.

That is midchart btw, because jump shift responses on the 2+ level have to be natural, raises, or game forcing on the GCC. I suppose you could put the game forcing hand in 2♥ and make the direct 2NT invitational, and then it would be GCC compliant.

2nt choice: Reverse flannery

[Echognome]

It's somewhat convoluted according to the poll options, because as far as I'm aware, reverse flannery needs only 1-bid and then you have a second bid free to assign to something else.

For what it's worth, Phil and I play after 1m:

2m = Lim+ Raise
JS in other minor = mixed raise
2♥ = Rev Flannery (5♠, 4♥ 5-9)
2♠ = Good 10 to Bad 12 bal
2N = Good 12 or better bal, GF
3m = Preemptive

I also like the treatment of natural invitational for 2M, but we handle those hands in a different manner (through 2-way nmf or NSI).

[Phil]

1st choice:

2♥ = reverse flannery - up to 9-ish.
2♠ = some sort of minor raise - either mixed or limit. Depending on your need, you can also play 2♠ as an invitational balanced hand, so you can play 2N as natural and GF, but it does give 4th chair an easy lead directing x.

I don't like two calls for reverse flannery.

2nd choice - SJS, although these need to be well defined. I prefer a single suiter that is solid or semi solid, or a hand with support.

I think fit jumps or a waste of time here. Weak jump shifts really aren't that bad if you have someone that insists on them and you can agree on some definitions.

[gwnn]

What do you mean 'waste of time'? It is a hand that is difficult to describe and is not very infrequent either (it is much more frequent than 1M-3m fit jump)

[kenrexford]

My preference/recommendation by an unpassed hand:

1minor-P-2M shows 8-11 (ish) with a six-card (or longer) suit. Kind of intermediate. The idea is that 1M...2M is weak (up to whatever the minimum looks like for you) and that 1M...3M is GF (whatever the minimum GF looks like, or better). Thus, the "range" fits in the middle. Other than this being easier (IMO), there are a few benefits worth note. First, the opponents are more likely punished for entering the auction. Second, when the deal is "their hand," the opponents won't learn of the distribution as rapidly. Third, when the auction starts 1minor-P-1Maj and then junk (competition/preemption) gets in the way, it is difficult to know what to do when holding that 8-11 hand as Responder. If you state that case immmediately, the "problem" becomes (after junk gets in the way) what to do with a garbage hand or with a GF hand, which is easier.

My preference/recommendation by a passed hand:

You won't have a six-card suit and 8-11, or less. You would have opened a weak two. So, play some sort of two-suiter, to solve problems. One idea is majors; I like this and make 2♥ 5♥/4-5♠ and weaker than 2♠ as 4-5♥/5♠. Alternatively, the bid major and the other minor also makes a lot of sense. Fit-bids, which are really this major and the opened major as a third two-suiter option, works very well also. Which to choose for me depends on which partrner likes most.

[Cascade]

Fit Jumps

[gnasher]

I prefer approximately what you've called "constructive", though I'd make it a point weaker. Then 1m-1M;any-2M is constructive to invitational, and 1m-1M;any-3M is game-forcing.

If I didn't play this, I'd play it as an invitational one-suiter. I wouldn't willingly give up its use as a natural bid of some strength - after 1m-1M;2m, there aren't enough bids to show all the ranges of one-suiter from weak up to a slam try.

Ken has made some sensible arguments for playing the jump shift as invitational. Some arguments for playing it as the weaker hand are:
- The jump shift puts opener in control, to a large extent. That works better if responder is weaker, because there's less to ask about.
- The jump shift makes it harder to find a fit in a minor. When responder is weak, we're less likely to have game on, so it's less likely to matter.
- Playing 1M as a continuous range means that responder can delay his decision about what strength to show until he's heard opener's rebid.

[Phil]

gwnn, on Dec 14 2009, 04:01 PM, said:

What do you mean 'waste of time'? It is a hand that is difficult to describe and is not very infrequent either (it is much more frequent than 1M-3m fit jump)

What it means is that you can describe a suit and then describe support in two bids instead of one call. Unless you are really worried about 4th chair getting into the bidding, there isn't much benefit in fit jumps.

In competition, obviously FJ's are really useful.

[Gerben42]

I've wasted 20 years trying all the options and I really think invitational is the best choice.

Natural very weak: Don't like it, 1M will do.Doesn't solve any other problems.
Natural weak: Better, but you're stuck with 6-4 majors you miss the fit in the other major...
Natural GF: Let's waste space when we own the hand... Yuck.
Artificial raise of the minor: That's why we play inv. minors.
Reverse Flannery: Close 2nd place but takes care of only one bid. Invites are easier and solve a rebid problem.
Fit Jumps: Might be nice when they come up but they are rare and when you're strong enough for the bid, responding 1M will usually do.

Leaves: Invitational. Nice because now 1m - 1M - suit bid - 3M is FG. Invitational 6-4 hands can still use NMF or Checkback.

[gwnn]

if you have AKxxx xx Qxxx xx how do you describe it over 1♦? you bid 1♠ and then?

[Gerben42]

Quote

  if you have AKxxx xx Qxxx xx how do you describe it over 1♦? you bid 1♠ and then?

Depends on what partner bids? If he bids 1NT, you can checkback, if he rebids something unbalanced like 2♣, better try 3♦ since he didn't raise you.

[Siegmund]

I voted natural constructive, since that's what I play with my regular partner (and an Ogust-like 2N rebid by opener), but I have no quarrel with strong Soloway jump or with fit-jump (with appropriate discussion about promised suit quality - my preference being KQxxx+), which I currently use only as a passed hand.

Interesting to see so much love for reverse Flannery. It looks like a reasonable idea, but never yet had a partner ask me to play it.

[awm]

Currently we play strong jumps. My feelings about this:

Strong jumps are okay. They do occasionally help us when they come up. But they don't come up that often, and there are frequently other ways to bid these hands using 2-way nmf for example. We don't use the strong jump on "balanced hands with only four-card suit" because we play responder's 2NT as 13-15/19+ and 3NT as 16-18 which seems to handle the flat hands fairly well.

Reverse flannery is probably not as useful given our 1NT rebid style. Many of the problem hands that reverse flannery helps with, like opener 1444 or 13(45) or 14(35) are typical 1NT rebids in our style so finding the heart fit is not difficult.

At the moment I'm leaning towards either the minor suit raises or the invitational jumps. The former helps with the "mixed raise" hand type that I seem to get annoyingly often, and also helps with the hands where you want to make a natural single raise. Neither of these hand types is really biddable in inverted minors. The invitational jumps get you out a level lower with invite opposite misfit, which seems like it could be a big win, plus it might become easier to bid some slam auctions when opener has extras.

[mike777]

FWIW

1minor=2h=reverse flannery
1minor=2s=limit raise in minor, unbalanced often.(crisscross)

[mike777]

Siegmund, on Dec 14 2009, 05:16 PM, said:

I voted natural constructive, since that's what I play with my regular partner (and an Ogust-like 2N rebid by opener), but I have no quarrel with strong Soloway jump or with fit-jump (with appropriate discussion about promised suit quality - my preference being KQxxx+), which I currently use only as a passed hand.

Interesting to see so much love for reverse Flannery. It looks like a reasonable idea, but never yet had a partner ask me to play it.

Reverse flannery has long been a forum fav....

[the hog]

hrothgar, on Dec 15 2009, 03:21 AM, said:

I know that this is going to sound terrible dated, but I am a big proponent of strong jump shifts over minor suit openings.

I prefer the Soloway style, in which the SJS shows either

1. A self sufficient suit
2. A NT oriented hand
3. A suit + a fit for partner's minor

Yes I agree with this treatment. If you are not going to play sjs, I prefer Reverse Flannery.