[32519]

I found the Jammer Two Diamonds on Bridge Buffs website.

An extract from the link:
Jammer Two Diamonds is a weak three-suiter, liberally defined to include three-card suits, so to include patterns 4-4-3-2 (22% of all hands), 5-4-3-1 (13%), 4-4-4-1 (3%) and 5-4-4-0 (1%), comprising in total some 39% of all hands.
If you did choose to play this, with a range of 4-9 HCP about 15% of your hands would qualify, and you would open two diamonds more often than any bid except pass.

Has anybody tried playing this before? Is it legal? Or is it yet another useless gimmick?

[manudude03]

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but unless it guarantees a specific 4 card suit or longer*, it will be a BSC which pretty much means that you won't be allowed to play it in the vast majority of events. When you add in the variations, then it just doesn't seem worth it, it looks like responder could have a very hard time untangling the shape with good hands. The problem with auctions going say 2D-2NT-3C-3H (invite) is that opener has no idea how good or bad the hand is (KJxx is huge opposite a fitting honor, but very bad opposite stiff etc).

Edit: And does the author really mean to use the same opener with a 4432 4 count and a 5431 9 count? The latter is going to play like 5 times better!

* Multi is the only exception, and even it is only because so many play it.

[P_Marlowe]

there are two versions

#1 2D showes a hand with short clubs
#2 2D showes a hand with 4 spades

The later version is similar to Erkren 2D, where promises
44 in the majors.
So the later is certainly playable, and this version is
not BSC.

The author does not say, you have to open 2D with 4432, 4HCP
red vs. green, you are allowed to use judgement.

I have not played it, but if you believe in the theory behind,
why not.
You need to accept the -??? numbers.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[hrothgar]

32519, on 2012-April-09, 03:36, said:

I found the Jammer Two Diamonds on Bridge Buffs website.

An extract from the link:
Jammer Two Diamonds is a weak three-suiter, liberally defined to include three-card suits, so to include patterns 4-4-3-2 (22% of all hands), 5-4-3-1 (13%), 4-4-4-1 (3%) and 5-4-4-0 (1%), comprising in total some 39% of all hands.
If you did choose to play this, with a range of 4-9 HCP about 15% of your hands would qualify, and you would open two diamonds more often than any bid except pass.

Has anybody tried playing this before? Is it legal? Or is it yet another useless gimmick?

I'm very fond of assumed fit methods, but I never liked the Jammer bids

From my perspective, three suited patterns are a lot better on defense than offense.
Consequently, I never liked the short suit Jammer 2♦

The variant in which 2♦ shows spades is a forcing bid!
You're showing a suit that you don't necessarily have which means that pairs with established agreements can play both takeout and penalty oriented doubles

Check out the following for - what I feel - is a much stronger implementation of the same design goal

http://www.chrisryal...wo/frelling.htm

[Trinidad]

hrothgar, on 2012-April-09, 06:30, said:

The variant in which 2♦ shows spades is a forcing bid!

I do not see why the variation that shows spades would be forcing. I would pass with a 1=2=4=6 distribution or a 1=2=6=4 distribution if I don't have the values to do anything constructively.

Rik

[hrothgar]

Trinidad, on 2012-April-09, 07:21, said:

I do not see why the variation that shows spades would be forcing. I would pass with a 1=2=4=6 distribution or a 1=2=6=4 distribution if I don't have the values to do anything constructively.

Rik

Technically, a multi 2D isn't forcing either. However, the vast majority of the time it gets taken out by partner.

[aguahombre]

If this convention actually is used with the various shapes and the strength described in the OP and the link, there would be only one classification of pair which might have consistent success employing it....for a short time.

[32519]

hrothgar, on 2012-April-09, 06:30, said:

I'm very fond of assumed fit methods, but I never liked the Jammer bids

From my perspective, three suited patterns are a lot better on defense than offense.
Consequently, I never liked the short suit Jammer 2♦

It would appear that only hrothgar may have actually toyed with the Jammer Two Diamonds at some or other stage.

I guess we can safely discard this gadget as something unlikely to catch on.

[hrothgar]

32519, on 2012-April-10, 01:01, said:

I guess we can safely discard this gadget as something unlikely to catch on.

Couple quick comments

1. Ekrens 2D is conceptually similar and has a faithful following in Europe. A reasonable number of participants in the Bermuda Bowl have played these types of assumed fit methods.
2. These methods are banned in ACBL-land (two suited openings which could be made on a 4-4 are deemed inherently destructive)

[helene_t]

There have been a number of threads about Jammer here already, for example:
http://www.bridgebas...mmer-2d-opening

You can search on "jammer".

[P_Marlowe]

hrothgar, on 2012-April-10, 03:51, said:

Couple quick comments

1. Ekrens 2D is conceptually similar and has a faithful following in Europe. A reasonable number of participants in the Bermuda Bowl have played these types of assumed fit methods.
2. These methods are banned in ACBL-land (two suited openings which could be made on a 4-4 are deemed inherently destructive)

I would also add Lionel, which is also conceptually similar, X showes spades + ?, starting with 44,
and for that matter DONT and so on ...

Of course starting with X makes is easier to end up in a minor, but if one has to open the bidding
X is not allowed.

I am not sure, if it would make sense to make the 2D bid the gf opening hand, and 2C the 2-suited
opening, which would mean, we have an easier chance ending up in diamonds, at least the short club
version would get more powerful.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[rbforster]

In the US, 4-4 weak bids are Superchart with a known suit or when they deny the suit opened. Things like 2♦ Jammer or 2♥ Multi that might or might not have the suit opened are not allowed in any US events, except your local club games if they're open minded.

[hrothgar]

rbforster, on 2012-April-22, 07:35, said:

In the US, 4-4 weak bids are Superchart with a known suit or when they deny the suit opened. Things like 2♦ Jammer or 2♥ Multi that might or might not have the suit opened are not allowed in any US events, except your local club games if they're open minded.

In the US, methods like jammer have been deemed intrinsically destructive and are banned at all levels of play.

[RMB1]

In England, opening two of a suit as a weak three-suiter (including 5-4-3-1 but not 4-4-3-2) with three cards in the suit bid is permitted at level 2: the lowest level above simple systems. (EBU Orange Book 11G3©)

[Cthulhu D]

Which leads to the weird situation that 2H as 4/4 in the majors weak is OK but 2D is banned.

[Zelandakh]

Cthulhu D, on 2012-April-22, 18:52, said:

Which leads to the weird situation that 2H as 4/4 in the majors weak is OK but 2D is banned.

It is allowed at Level 3 though.

[Cthulhu D]

Zelandakh, on 2012-April-23, 01:26, said:

It is allowed at Level 3 though.

Good point. Still weird though. How common is level 3?

[Zelandakh]

Cthulhu D, on 2012-April-23, 01:33, said:

Good point. Still weird though. How common is level 3?

When I played in England, admittedly some time ago and rarely, I do not remember playing in any game that was not Level 3. As an example the Multi-coloured 2♦ opening is Level 3 and this is reasonably common and expected except in beginner games.

[campboy]

Nowadays almost all national events are level 4. Club and county events tend to be level 3 or 4 depending on the area. Level 2 is rare outside of specifically novice-friendly events. As Zel says, the popularity of multi means that level 2 would be undesirable for most clubs.