[jillybean]

---

Keeping with the theme, I watched this hand go 1♥ 4nt

With my methods, I bid Jacoby 2nt and partner will tell me he has no shortage.

How does your system progress after 1♥?

[DavidKok]

1♥-2NT Maas and now it's up to opener.

In general my raise structure of 1M openings is as follows:

6-'bad 9', 3(+) support: 2M.
'good 9'-'bad 14', 3(+) support: 2NT (note: if 13-14 then always balanced).
'good 14' and up, 3(+) support: 2♣-then-support.
Direct 3M is 0-6 ish with 4(+) support, direct 4M is 0-6 ish with 5(+) support or a suitable hand with 4.
I like 1M-3NT as 6-9 ish with 5(+) support, but most here prefer to play it as a splinter in the other major.
I don't have a mixed raise, and do miss it a little.

[jdiana]

I would also start with Jacoby 2NT. Where we go from there depends on opener's rebid - there are several different ways, of course, to say "I have no shortage".

[mw64ahw]

1♥-4N whatever they are on they need to stop taking it.

I have a granular raise structure over 1♥ with
1♥-2/3/4♥ all pre-emptive
1♥-2♦ being constructive, a high 3-card limit raise or 5+♦ GI
1♥-1♠-3♦/3♥ are good and weak 3-card limit raises.
1♥-2♠ is lim+, 4+♥
Other bids cover mixed raises and specific slam shapes.

My method for showing lim+ 4+ support gives away little in terms of shape with 2♠ asking for a hcp count. 2N is minimum (10-12).

Responders rebid then shows a modified loser count and opener can judge what level of contract is appropriate.
So opposite, for example
1♥-2♠-2N
.. 3♣ <=7.5mlt >5.5mlt
.. 3♦ 8mlt
.. 3♥ 8.5mlt
.. these bids are control bids with 15+hcp <=5.5mlt
.. 4♥ <=7mlt, <15hcp
The bids are symmetric over 1♠-2N to aid memory.

[akwoo]

In the methods I like best, I bid 2♠, 4+hearts, limit raise or better.

Given that opener has no shortness, there are 3 possible bids:

2N, showing any hand that will not accept the invite
3♣, showing a hand that will accept the invite based on high card strength but has no shortness
4♥, showing any hand that will accept the invite based on having a 6th heart, but with minimum high card strength.

[jillybean]

---

[mw64ahw]

As North my method is to open 1N not 1♥ so any 15-17 pointer would not be balanced using a Jacoby approach. Regardless I end in 4♥ either way.

Very simply a 6 vs 7.5 modified loser hand is a low probability slam with upgrades unavailable.

[DavidKok]

I would also open 1NT, but assuming that we play a weak notrump for a second or that I play 14-16 (which this hand is too strong for) my auction would be 1♥-2NT; 3NT-4♥. Here 3NT is an offer to play facing a balanced hand, particularly with 3-card support. Since 2NT limits the hand a slam is never in the picture, and we can have a relatively low information auction.

[jillybean]

Playing standard methods,

1H 2nt* gf unlimited
3H showing 16+, no shortage.

South is now warned that both hands are flat ,other than the 55 heart fit.

[Cyberyeti]

DavidKok, on 2024-October-05, 01:29, said:

I would also open 1NT, but assuming that we play a weak notrump for a second or that I play 14-16 (which this hand is too strong for) my auction would be 1♥-2NT; 3NT-4♥. Here 3NT is an offer to play facing a balanced hand, particularly with 3-card support. Since 2NT limits the hand a slam is never in the picture, and we can have a relatively low information auction.

So if the S hand is AQx, Kxxxx, xxx, Ax or the N hand is Kxx, Axxxx, Axx, Ax you don't sniff the excellent slam in either case

[DavidKok]

Cyberyeti, on 2024-October-05, 04:11, said:

So if the S hand is AQx, Kxxxx, xxx, Ax or the N hand is Kxx, Axxxx, Axx, Ax you don't sniff the excellent slam in either case

I think I'd miss those. Alternatively North might bid 3♣ over 2NT to show slam interest rather than my 3NT, but I am not sure I would.

[mw64ahw]

Cyberyeti, on 2024-October-05, 04:11, said:

So if the S hand is AQx, Kxxxx, xxx, Ax or the N hand is Kxx, Axxxx, Axx, Ax you don't sniff the excellent slam in either case

These are a touch better than the OPs hands with 6+7 modified losers and puts you in slam territory.

[mycroft]

In your methods, after 3♦ "no shortage", one of "the relay" or "the major" should be general strength asking, no? Or does it show a non-minimum, 3♣ being "all minimums"? If so, it's useful information for the further auction with the flat 13.

I love "shape first, strength can wait to the 4 level" 2/1 style methods like we have in D18; because "someone has extras" needs to be shown. Now, Serious/Frivolous 3NT might apply, which will help; but anywhere where we deliberately make it harder to limit a 12-21 (or a 12+) hand should be investigated for a better solution.

Decades ago I had system notes (rumour was, from Glubok) of a two-way 1♣ system, where he declaimed "One of the first three bids in a partnership auction should limit their hand" and specifically pointed out 1M-2NT-3shortness as a horrible counterexample. Which is why many have moved to 3♣ being "any nonembarassing minimum" so at least we have 15-21 (and responder will soon be able to distinguish between "min GF and extras", as well.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

you show a gameforcing raise in hearts.

For us, this is via 2D xfer to 2H, but if p executes, limiting his hand to
approx. 16/17, I shortcut the auction with 4H.

Standard methods:

The response to the 2NT inquiry by Nort is 3NT, showing a semibal. with 15-17.
Sout with a bal. 13 count ends the auction with 4H.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[jillybean]

mycroft, on 2024-October-05, 10:47, said:

In your methods, after 3♦ "no shortage", one of "the relay" or "the major" should be general strength asking, no? Or does it show a non-minimum, 3♣ being "all minimums"? If so, it's useful information for the further auction with the flat 13.

My method, 3C min hand with shortage, 3D any hand, no shortage, 3H ~15, shortage in clubs, 3S !15 short diamonds, 3nt 15 short o/M

I'm not so much asking the question for my benefit, the question is where does this partnership who bids 1H 4nt start.

This:

P_Marlowe, on 2024-October-05, 15:37, said:

Standard methods:

The response to the 2NT inquiry by Nort is 3NT, showing a semibal. with 15-17.
Sout with a bal. 13 count ends the auction with 4H.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mycroft]

Absolutely, the 4NT "we might have slam" pairs need to start by learning that 4NT is a way to stay out of bad slams, not a way to get to good ones.

Once they understand that (unfortunately, the friendly talks from friends or teachers explaining this don't tend to get through as quickly as being spiked on the 1♥-4NT; 5♦-slooow 5♥; fork (*), but eventually they do understand) they learn what they need - some game-forcing heart raise (so they don't have to worry about being passed!), and responses. Now they could be the same poor responses "we all" play, but at least those lead to Marlowe's result: 1♥-2NT!; 3NT!-4♥. Then, they learn that they need to know not only keycards in bulk, but how to handle "I have a wide open diamond suit"; then the discussion about control-showing cuebids comes.

Bot all of this only works *after* they see the problems with their current ways of slam bidding. For some reason, as long as it "keeps working" they don't see any reason to change it. "We might have slam" Ace-asking (I mean, it's the primary reason for "always-on Gerber", so they can say "we might have slam" and still stop in 4!) is one of the most kudzu-like things in this level of player's systems - bad, difficult to remove, and spreads to the other partner's other partners...(**)

Your system, I hope there is a way to get the 1♥-2NT!; 3NT!-4♥ information exchanged after 3♦. I assume so. No worries - not relevant to the question.

(*) either partner passes (and when they have the K in the danger suit, it holds the losers to 1) or they bid 6 because they know that slow signoff means "we're off only one KC, but I have two quick losers in a suit" and they've got it covered. Only to find the director at the table (this time, because some unfriendly curmudgeon is their opponent this time...)
(**) I remember (3♠)-4♣-4♥; p. Yes, one ace. And 2♣-2♦; 4NT - systemically KC for diamonds, and that auction was perpetrated against me by that pair more than once.

[akwoo]

 jillybean, on 2024-October-05, 17:26, said:

I'm not so much asking the question for my benefit, the question is where does this partnership who bids 1H 4nt start.

The first question is - do they actually want to learn some conventions, or are they just playing for fun and not inerested in that level of sophistication, or perhaps they have enough trouble with bridge as it is and a convention would be too much for their brains to handle.

Second - if Jacoby 2N is too much for a pair, they really should play 1M-3M as forcing as in Goren. There are other ways to handle the limit raise - either by first making a non-GF 2/1 response or by first making a semi-forcing 1N response.

[DavidKok]

 jillybean, on 2024-October-05, 17:26, said:

I'm not so much asking the question for my benefit, the question is where does this partnership who bids 1H 4nt start.

In all seriousness: learn a raise ladder. One of the questions I always ask in pickup partnerships is "how do I raise your 1M opening?". It is vital to know how to support partner both in and out of competition. Literally take out a sheet of paper (or an Excel sheet) and make a table: 3-card support, 4-card support, 5(+)-card support. Weak (0-5), simple (6-9), invitational (10-11), minimum GF (12-14), slammish (15+). Then, for the entire crosstable, write down your bidding plan both in and out of competition. If any of them read "jump to 4NT" that doesn't make me happy but at least it creates clarity on which hand types go where and which might struggle in their system.

As a second step, once this is written out in detail, consider what they might wish to change. I think this is a lower priority than knowing what the current agreements are, but they can be done in parallel. Mycroft's response is spot on.

[thepossum]

I would likely have bid 2NT and ended in game

As a curiosity I put the hands into a favorite bridge engine playing 2/1 and Jacoby and it found 6H (south started control bidding after North's 3NT)

[mike777]

Fwiw Bergen's version of Jacoby 2NT. In this specific example 1NT..3NT
😊