[MrAce]

I think the expectations are different from 1m--2♥ wjs. It surprised me to see some replies that suggests 1♥ and then 2♥ is almost equal to 1♥ and then 3♥

For some people AJT9xx is too good for wjs, since it is in normal response range. Imo any 6 card suit that starts with an Ace is good enough to bid 1 and then 2 especially if he has the spots. So without the ♣ K i would bid 1♥ and then 2♥. Thus i dont think N has any blame whatsoever.

When i bid 2♥ over 1 minor (if i played it wjs) it would look like more to xxx QJTxxx xxx x - xx KTxxxx xxxx x

[FrancesHinden]

MrAce, on 2012-April-12, 12:30, said:

I think the expectations are different from 1m--2♥ wjs. It surprised me to see some replies that suggests 1♥ and then 2♥ is almost equal to 1♥ and then 3♥

For some people AJT9xx is too good for wjs, since it is in normal response range. Imo any 6 card suit that starts with an Ace is good enough to bid 1 and then 2 especially if he has the spots. So without the ♣ K i would bid 1♥ and then 2♥. Thus i dont think N has any blame whatsoever.

When i bid 2♥ over 1 minor (if i played it wjs) it would look like more to xxx QJTxxx xxx x - xx KTxxxx xxxx x

There are various ways of playing weak jump shifts. It's a common English approach to play an immediate jump as a lower range weak two (about 4-8 or so), to play 1 then 2 as constructive (about 9-12 or so) and 1 then 3 as game forcing.
I think it works well; I have less interest in making a purely pre-emptive call after partner has opened and the next hand passed, and it greatly improves constructive bidding.

See http://www.ebu.co.uk...gust/Debate.pdf for more information on this style.

[MrAce]

FrancesHinden, on 2012-April-12, 12:44, said:

There are various ways of playing weak jump shifts. It's a common English approach to play an immediate jump as a lower range weak two (about 4-8 or so), to play 1 then 2 as constructive (about 9-12 or so) and 1 then 3 as game forcing.
I think it works well; I have less interest in making a purely pre-emptive call after partner has opened and the next hand passed, and it greatly improves constructive bidding.

See http://www.ebu.co.uk...gust/Debate.pdf for more information on this style.

I never said i do it for preemptiing ? I dont do it for preempting opponents, though it may function now and then for this purpose too coincidentally, i do it to show my hand to my pd, since it is out of question for me to pass with these hands. Playing 4-8 is a huge huge range imo. Also it is deceptive if we look at it as HCP. There are 5 hcps with Qx KTxxxx xxxx x and there is xx AJTxxx xxxx x. Also xxx KQJxxx xxx x 6 hcp and there is Kx JTxxxx xxx Qx, those are not same hands for me ( i am pretty sure they arent same for you either)

Also there are hands where you have a fit or tolerance to pd's minor it may even be much weaker because all you need may be a 3 card fit to make game, such as after 1♣;

JTxxxxx
x
xx
Jxx

(Though i strongly suggest to play 1♣--2♦ = a weak jump shift in a major, just like multi, it works great over 1♣ and is workable over 1♦, something i played 20 years ago and it worked very well for me.)

So basically when you talk about constructive bidding, you need to set your priorities about what are you trying to construct for. Slams or games ? Will you pass in peace when you hold QTxxxx x xx xxxx when your pd opens a minor ? RHO passing increases to chance that your pd may have a big hand, which bid can tell this hand better than a wjs and get it out of your chest in 1 bid vs a pd who may have a big hand ?

I mean we can make simulation and figure that we are not likely to make game when we hold this. But that means nothing to me since simulations will not tell us if it would be a good save or not to find a save vs 4♠ or even 3NT if we have a fit. In defense this hand is a dead man, if we play, however, it offers hell lot of tricks.

Let me compromise the example i gave to x QJTxxx xx xxxx and your pd opens 1♣, then this becomes close to your 4-8 range and reasonable. But then again if you bid 2♥ with this and also 2♥ with 8 hcp hands, your pd is totally in trouble deciding when and what to do. Often will make a move that will end up getting minus score or will not make a move and miss something.

Thats why i like

1♣--2♦ = WJS in a major
1♦-2♦ = WJs in a major
1♦--2♣ = GF just like over 1M but doesnt promise a ♣ suit yet.
1m--2M = Invitational

I also disagree that playing the style you suggest allows you to play 1M followed by 3M can be used as GF slam hands. What was responder supposed to start with with 6♥+4♠ and 4 hcp only ? He can not start wjs due to side 4 card major. He will start 1♥ and then will bid 2♥ when pd bids 2 minor or 1 NT. Or if he has a little more than this , he would like to invite to game, but he can not do this since that will be a slam going hand in your method, unless you have this taken care somewhere else in your system. But even so, just because of the range of wjs, you can not have this luxury, you need to take care of things like 6-4 majors first somewhere in your system.

[rhm]

MrAce, on 2012-April-12, 13:38, said:

...

I also disagree that playing the style you suggest allows you to play 1M followed by 3M can be used as GF slam hands. What was responder supposed to start with with 6♥+4♠ and 4 hcp only ? He can not start wjs due to side 4 card major.
...

A sever problem with the standard approach is that jump rebidding your major to show an invitational hand when opener has shown at least 9 cards in the minors gets you frequently too high on the likely misfit.
This scenario is frequent and this is a serious deficiency of standard systems.

The solution is in deed to play the jump rebid as game forcing. The idea is less to facilitate slam bidding, though it does, but to stay low on the above frequent scenario, opener having a distributional minor suit oriented hand, but with minimum HCP, and responder having average HCP values with a reasonable but not solid six card or longer major.

Your approach may better differentiate weak from very weak responding hands, but it does nothing to solve the above dilemma, which happens far more often.
Bidding must be geared to solving frequent scenarios first, not to the rare ones. Average hands around 10 HCPs occur more often than hands around 4 HCP and distributional hands with just enough to open are far more common than distributional hands having substantially more.
If you have a weak responding hand, game is unlikely in the first place and it is well known that you may be able to show only your main feature, since you can not overstate your meager values by taking several bids. So with 6♥+4♠ and 4 hcp only, you just bid 2 ♥ and forget about the spades.
Unless your partner is strong enough to introduce the spades, it is quite unlikely you would have done better in a spades contract than in your long suit when you are that weak.

So I think you get your priorities wrong and the trade-off between these two approaches are fairly clear.

Rainer Herrmann

[gnasher]

Playing the style that Frances advocates, with QTxxxx x xx xxxx facing a minor-suit opening it's generally OK to respond 1♠. If partner rebids 1NT you can sign off in 2♠ without showing extra values; if he rebids his minor or bids 1♦-1♠;2♣ you can pass. The only really awkward auction is 1♦-1♠;2♥, when you'll probably end up in the wrong partscore opposite a 2452 or 1453 shape.

[MrAce]

rhm, on 2012-April-13, 04:10, said:

A sever problem with the standard approach is that jump rebidding your major to show an invitational hand when opener has shown at least 9 cards in the minors gets you frequently too high on the likely misfit.
This scenario is frequent and this is a serious deficiency of standard systems.

The solution is in deed to play the jump rebid as game forcing. The idea is less to facilitate slam bidding, though it does, but to stay low on the above frequent scenario, opener having a distributional minor suit oriented hand, but with minimum HCP, and responder having average HCP values with a reasonable but not solid six card or longer major.

Your approach may better differentiate weak from very weak responding hands, but it does nothing to solve the above dilemma, which happens far more often.

This is what happens when you write something w/o reading the entire post. I am not against what you said about standart bidding and jumping to 3 level with invitation hands. What i said was, this fact doesnt allow people to use jump to 3 level showing GF hands risk free. You are looking at things as hcp range when it serves to your arguments and you write "it is not all about beans" when it serves to your agreement in another topic. If you make a game invitation by jumping in a suit like KJ9xxx of course the danger you stated arises. But if you keep those invitations ONLY to very good suits, semi solid suits it wont. You can use 1m-2M as game invitation with softer values ( read my suggestion)

gnasher, on 2012-April-13, 07:19, said:

Playing the style that Frances advocates, with QTxxxx x xx xxxx facing a minor-suit opening it's generally OK to respond 1♠. If partner rebids 1NT you can sign off in 2♠ without showing extra values; if he rebids his minor or bids 1♦-1♠;2♣ you can pass. The only really awkward auction is 1♦-1♠;2♥, when you'll probably end up in the wrong partscore opposite a 2452 or 1453 shape.

It is not as black and white as Rainer shows it. It is not about only weak hands either but also about game invitation hands with 6-4 as well as GF hands with 6-4.

Assume bidding went like

1♦--1♠
2♦

A-You hold a very weak hand (since the wjs advocated was 4-8 wide range): Then you have to pass and hope for the best, perhaps lost 6-2 fit and played in 6-1 and sometimes 5-1 ♦. Thats not big deal i admit.

** If you had slightly better hand, you would bid 2♠ or 2♥ as Rainer suggests and forget about the side major. The problem with this approach is, while Rainer advicing me to forget the side 4 card major with such a weak hand, he is also advocating a style where we dont bid wjs with such weak hands, thus his analysis about the hand being so weak goes in the sky somewhere. It may indeed not matter if you are making a wjs just like i do, but if you are making a jump shift as strong as 4-8 HCP, oh boy, that side 4 card major matters, believe me !

B-You hold a game invitation hand : You then have to bid either 2♠ and play 6-1 ♠ when pd doesnt like his hand for ♠ game and when you are cold for 4♥. Or you can try to start 2♥ now hoping that you will be able to invite somehow later, and hear 2 NT from partner or 3♦. He doesnt know you have 6♠ yet, what will i do ? Pass 2 NT or 3♦ ? Or make a bid that will be GF ?

C-You have a GF hand. Obviously you will have to start with 2♥ eventhough this doesnt neccesarilly show ♥ suit, you still wanna check if he has 4 of them. So you wont be able to bid 3♠ as GF here either eventhough you have one.

[gnasher]

MrAce, on 2012-April-13, 11:36, said:

B-You hold a game invitation hand : You then have to bid either 2♠ and play 6-1 ♠ when pd doesnt like his hand for ♠ game and when you are cold for 4♥. Or you can try to start 2♥ now hoping that you will be able to invite somehow later, and hear 2 NT from partner or 3♦. He doesnt know you have 6♠ yet, what will i do ? Pass 2 NT or 3♦ ? Or make a bid that will be GF ?

How does playing very weak jump shifts solve this problem?

[MrAce]

gnasher, on 2012-April-13, 17:47, said:

How does playing very weak jump shifts solve this problem?

It doesnt, i never said it does (wjs), but this doesnt change the fact that you can not bid 4-8 jump shifts with those hands either which auto affects bidding 1 major and then 3 major hands.

What solves this problem is either

-to play 1M and then 3M as game inv hands, not GF hands, because you have to be able to make a game invitation with 6-4 majors

or

- You can play artificial wjs as i explained in my structure with additions.

1m--2D = either wjs in a major or 6-4 hands, opener bids as if you have a wjs hand, and then you can bid on with 6-4 game invitation hands.

1♣--2♦*
2♥*--Now you can pass, or bid 2♠, or show a 6-4 inv hands with precise shape. ( sorry i didnt bother to write more , i am sure you got it) i admit i am not really big fan of this part.

But in principle, all i am trying to tell you is, people think bidding 1 M and then 3M is GF because they found a way to immediately show 6 card major invitation hands (or because they made the WJS sounder so the rebid of major became an invitation bid). This is not exactly true because there are hands that can not make this immediate 6 card invitation bids (or sound WJS with 6-4) whether this can be 1M and then 2M, or direct 2M invitations. There are other factors too when making an invitation and showing a 6 card suit, unfortunately 6 card suits dont come with a certain standart everytime.

To be honest, i cant see the difficulty in establishing a GF auction with a 6 card major in std methods either. Rainer has a point about game inviting hands at 3 level being too bulky bid in some hands when done with soft values, but this is easy problem to solve. Wouldnt you be happy to know whether partner is making the game invitation with a random 6 card major and 9-11 ish hcp or with a very good suit when deciding to accept or not or if you will accept whether 3 NT or 4 major ? Or even if you have a giant and know that he has a soft 6 card suit ? Imo we face this type of decisions much more than the slam going hands, and as i said with 6 card major and a GF hand you can almost always show this hand at 3 level with standart methods (going thru 3rd suit forcing usually when opener rebids his minor, or 4th suit, or 2 way nmf or xyz )

[phil_20686]

MrAce, on 2012-April-13, 23:15, said:

To be honest, i cant see the difficulty in establishing a GF auction with a 6 card major in std methods either. Rainer has a point about game inviting hands at 3 level being too bulky bid in some hands when done with soft values, but this is easy problem to solve. Wouldnt you be happy to know whether partner is making the game invitation with a random 6 card major and 9-11 ish hcp or with a very good suit when deciding to accept or not or if you will accept whether 3 NT or 4 major ? Or even if you have a giant and know that he has a soft 6 card suit ? Imo we face this type of decisions much more than the slam going hands, and as i said with 6 card major and a GF hand you can almost always show this hand at 3 level with standart methods (going thru 3rd suit forcing usually when opener rebids his minor, or 4th suit, or 2 way nmf or xyz )

Its useful to be able to differentiate between really good six card suits, and mediocre ones. Two ways to get two 3M in a GF manner definitely helps.

[Benoit35]

South 100% at fault for not reaching game. Slam is another story, pretty hard to bid.

With my regular partner, North would open 1♣ and then reverse 2♦ showing strength rather than the exact distribution.

What then? South must make a forcing bid now that game is in sight (5♣ if nothing else). We would probably go:

1♣ - 1♥
2♦ - 3♥
4♥

Having found the major game on a 25 combined HCP, and no way to ask for aces, South should pass, and expect a near-top. Unless the partnership has a way to ask for aces, it's crazy to swing for the fence here.

[Statto]

South should bid something other than 2♥ on the 2nd round. 2♥ is a weak sign-off with a 6-card suit; well, it is the way I play normally. South's hand is verging on better than that, and they know of a ♣ fit to boot.