[jdiana]

Playing a standard, old-fashioned, Jacoby 2NT, is opener ever allowed to bid 4M even with shortness? For example, if you stretch to open a 10- or 11-point hand and responder bids 2NT, are you obligated to show shortness or, alternatively, does bidding, e.g., 3m show shortness plus more than a dead minimum?

[jillybean]

Good question. If I've opened an 11 count I've evaluated the hand sufficient to open 1M so yes, I show the shortness.
If I've opened a 10 count 1M it is probably a 65xx distribution, I will show the shortness.
If I'm embarrassed by my opening I may rethink acting next time but once I've opened, I must keep to our system.

[awm]

jillybean, on 2024-December-24, 10:15, said:

Good question. If I've opened an 11 count I've evaluated the hand sufficient to open 1M so yes, I show the shortness.
If I've opened a 10 count 1M it is probably a 65xx distribution, I will show the shortness.
If I'm embarrassed by my opening I may rethink acting next time but once I've opened, I must keep to our system.

I wouldn't neglect to show shortness simply based on having a poor hand; however, I've occasionally neglected to show shortness when it's a singleton king or queen.

[jdiana]

awm, on 2024-December-24, 10:46, said:

I wouldn't neglect to show shortness simply based on having a poor hand; however, I've occasionally neglected to show shortness when it's a singleton king or queen.

I agree with that. And what JB describes is what I was taught and how I've always played (with your exception for aces and kings - similar to our rules for splintering). But when I play practice hands on FunBridge, the robot treats it differently. The description for a 3-level rebid is "Between 14 and 23 points. 'Forcing' bid. Shortness in (the suit bid) (a singleton or void)." Sometimes, if I make a 3-level rebid, it's off to the races with slam bidding.

So, that got me wondering. The Argine robots' bidding is based on the French system so maybe they play it a little differently over there.

[jillybean]

jdiana, on 2024-December-24, 10:59, said:

"Between 14 and 23 points. 'Forcing' bid.

Good luck finding your slams when the bots need 14hcp to cooperate.

Agree with comment about singleton KQ

[thepossum]

An example of a robot minimum hand

---

Just yesterday

I was disappointed but we made 5

It does make 6 though*

*disclaimer

[mike777]

 thepossum, on 2024-December-24, 15:05, said:

An example of a robot minimum hand

---

Just yesterday

I was disappointed but we made 5

It does make 6 though*

*disclaimer

The bot did have its bid per system...that is a good thing

South has a dead minimum at best...

[thepossum]

mike777, on 2024-December-24, 16:01, said:

The bot did have its bid per system...that is a good thing

South has a dead minimum at best...

Yes South has a minimum and is allegedly best hand too - not sure if North knows that though

I still maintain disappointment that North claimed a minimum

[mike777]

 thepossum, on 2024-December-24, 17:04, said:

Yes South has a minimum and is allegedly best hand too - not sure if North knows that though

I still maintain disappointment that North claimed a minimum

At least in the future you know you can trust the detailed description..and what it means, helpful. Forget the short summary of minimum 😊

With that South hand you are not going on...dead minimum.

[thepossum]

mike777, on 2024-December-24, 17:53, said:

At least in the future you know you can trust the detailed description..and what it means, helpful. Forget the short summary of minimum ��

With that South hand you are not going on...dead minimum.

That is irrelevant Mike
I could have had a stronger hand and passed
North only knows I have a 2NT and has no right to make that decision for me

Two minimums do not make a 5 and almost 6 contract

Use a siplistic loser approach - North has 5 or 6 and South has 8

But imagine South has 6 or 7

Please stop resulting with an individual hand
I thought we were discussing the system and some pitfalls over how opener assess their rebid

Is not a minimum in the 8 loser area

[mike777]

 thepossum, on 2024-December-24, 18:25, said:

That is irrelevant Mike
I could have had a stronger hand and passed
North only knows I have a 2NT and has no right to make that decision for me

Two minimums do not make a 5 and almost 6 contract

Use a siplistic loser approach - North has 5 or 6 and South has 8

But imagine South has 6 or 7

Please stop resulting with an individual hand
I thought we were discussing the system and some pitfalls over how opener assess their rebid

Is not a minimum in the 8 loser area

No, I was not discussing the merits or demerits of the Bots system.

What you call irrelevant, I say is the most important point.

I was applauding the Bots for sticking to their system, a significant challenge.

I don't know their system.
For me that North hand is definitely extras. For me an adjusted 4 losing Trick Count, definitely start cue bidding or something over 2NT, a giant North hand.

Any event end up in 4H.

A side discussion, based on the bidding only, yes the South hand is an adjusted 8 losing Trick Count.
Why?
North only promised 5H, thus, we are only in a known 9 card fit.
If the system told us a known ten card fit, then only an adjusted 7 LTC..

[jillybean]

Mike, sitting North you would bid 3♠/2nt?

[mike777]

 jillybean, on 2024-December-24, 20:39, said:

Mike, sitting North you would bid 3♠/2nt?

Over 2NT, I would rebid 3NT. Showing this type of hand.
About 14-16, no stiff or void, 6H, Deny semi balanced.
6322 shape very often. 7222 possible but rare.
I play Bergen's version of Jacoby 2NT.
I should add the version I know is more than 20 years old. There may be updated versions.