[JLilly]

Hi all,

How do 2/1 bidders, and also Std. American bidders, play jump-shifts by responder after both opponents have passed? In this position, there's no need for preempting opponents using the prevailing weak jump-shift, so what meaning is assigned to responder in a sequence such as (P)-1H-(P)-3C? What if opener's suit is a minor: (P)-1D-(P)-2S?

It seems that in 2/1 at least, the bid could be used to unload the forcing 1NT response. (P)-1M-(P)-3m could be played as a balanced 3-card limit raise with a stopper in the bid suit. In this case, 3NT may be a better contract than 4M, and it would be wrong-sided by a forcing 1NT response.

Thanks, JL

[Stephen Tu]

Jump shift to minor, natural and invitational covers a hole if using 2/1 as GF even when suit rebid. Older Eastern Scientific styles treated uncontested sequences such as 1h-2c-2h-3c as inv NF, this replaces that sequence. If rebidding after a 2/1 is forcing, then without this treatment either 1nt followed by 3C has an uncomfortably wide range, or one tends to overbid a bit and force to game on invitational hands.

The other somewhat common alternative is Bergen, which gets very mixed reviews

Using for 3 cd LR only, to me is wasteful. It's not common, and your idea of 3nt being right to me is unlikely if your partnership opens 1nt on 5 cd major. If have 10-11 flat to me quite unlikely siding makes a significant difference. If partner has 18-19 bal you are almost surely making. I'd much rather play Bergen than this.

For 1m-2M, this really is whatever you want it to be. Possibilities that all have some merit:
- weak jump shift (I personally prefer European style where this is not ultra weak, e.g. 5-8, not the American style <=5 hcp)
- strong jump shift
- invitational jump shift
- responder's reverse Flannery (5+/4+ in majors, weak/inv for 2H/2S respectively)
- inv 2nt bid (letting direct 2nt be GF)
- inv 2nt bid + other meanings (2S asks, other meanings can be some range of minor raise, others can be strong jump shift in M)

[Cyberyeti]

We use it as a fit type bid, to better allow partner to bid thin games/slams with the right holdings, but (mini or normal) splinter also works. Should matter if partner is also a passed hand.

[steve2005]

JLilly, on 2017-October-08, 15:03, said:

Hi all,

How do 2/1 bidders, and also Std. American bidders, play jump-shifts by responder after both opponents have passed? In this position, there's no need for preempting opponents using the prevailing weak jump-shift, so what meaning is assigned to responder in a sequence such as (P)-1H-(P)-3C? What if opener's suit is a minor: (P)-1D-(P)-2S?

It seems that in 2/1 at least, the bid could be used to unload the forcing 1NT response. (P)-1M-(P)-3m could be played as a balanced 3-card limit raise with a stopper in the bid suit. In this case, 3NT may be a better contract than 4M, and it would be wrong-sided by a forcing 1NT response.

Thanks, JL

While there is nothing wrong with your idea or others suggestions. I know of no pair that play:
(P)-1H-(P)-3C different from
1H-(P)-3C
Maybe they should.
In theory, you could have a completely different bidding system depending on seat and vulnerability.
Indeed the last world champions played 2 different systems.
Memory strain seems to keep good ideas like yours out.

[LBengtsson]

1m - 2M 4/7 6+M 1M - 3m 8/11 6+m i like greater than bergen

[msjennifer]

The jump sequences described above and the interpretations given in the other posts are definitely useful.Bergen rules out all these developments and hence I ,personally,hate it (Bergen).However ,I doubt If two bidding systems are allowed in a pair event where you play with a new partner every two deals or with a regular partner since the explanations either asked or referred from your system card takes too much time and waste of time and you can’t finish 2boards in the given time resulting in penalties.One has to find out from partners profile/ subtle enquiries.To quote an example,a pair who played Precision when opponents were Red and SAYC when they were white were barred by the director and asked to play only one system or else leave the event.

[GrahamJson]

I think that it is wrong to assume that weak jump shifts are intended to be pre-emptive. Yes, they have some pre-empt value but I think that their main purpose is to be an integral part of the system. For example, a WJS in a major (e.g 1C-2H) is used on minimum hands, allowing a simple rebid (1C-1H-2C-2H) to be constructive (7-12) which in turn allows a jump rebid to be forcing. Hence if you were to stop playing WJS in fourth position you would need to revise other bids as well. This of course is possible but, as others have said, would increase the load on your memory so could be counter productive.

[fromageGB]

steve2005, on 2017-October-08, 18:16, said:

I know of no pair that plays (P)-1H-(P)-3C differently to 1H-(P)-3C

Absolutely.

As to what 3C means, Stephen gave an excellent answer. For me, this is just part of my non-Bergen 4 card support methods, and 1C (p) 2M is 6 card natural NF up to 8hcp, so that 9/10 can be shown by a simple bid and a rebid.

[The_Badger]

JLilly, on 2017-October-08, 15:03, said:

How do 2/1 bidders, and also Std. American bidders, play jump-shifts by responder after both opponents have passed? In this position, there's no need for preempting opponents using the prevailing weak jump-shift, so what meaning is assigned to responder in a sequence such as (P)-1H-(P)-3C? What if opener's suit is a minor: (P)-1D-(P)-2S?

Another way of looking at this is that you are providing a highly-descriptive bid for partner to act on. If you want to take away the weakness option of especially 1m-2M then so be it, but I've never considered 1m-2M or 1M-3m as pre-emptive, more descriptive and constructive. It does make life easier for the opener to know that you have a 6 card suit and a certain point range immediately.

[Vampyr]

msjennifer, on 2017-October-09, 00:03, said:

However ,I doubt If two bidding systems are allowed in a pair event where you play with a new partner every two deals

I think it is allowed, but it is not very convenient. Not long ago I played in an individual which had two possible systems. Before every round you had to agree which one to use, and people always seemed to want exceptions. Both had a fair number of conventions, many of which could not really be played with no discussion. For example, people in this country will call a forcing M raise Jacoby even when they use a different set of responses. One prescribed card that is extremely simple is much better.

Quote

or with a regular partner since the explanations either asked or referred from your system card takes too much time and waste of time and you can’t finish 2boards in the given time resulting in penalties.

I don't think that there is anything in the Laws which prohibit this. I tried to find something but I couldn't. A pair who are barred for this should ask for an appeal, if it can be done before the event is over (i.e. between sessions). Otherwise a talk with the SO or club management could be appropriate.

[GrahamJson]

Vampyr, on 2017-October-09, 22:27, said:

I think it is allowed, but it is not very convenient. Not long ago I played in a individual which had two possible systems. Before every round you had to agree which one to use, and people always seemed to want exceptions. Best th had a fair number of conventions, many of which could not really be played with no discussion. For example, people in this country will call a forcing M raise Jacoby even when they use a different set of responses. One prescribed card that is extremely simple is much better.



I don't think that there is anything in the Laws which prohibit this. I tried to find something but I couldn't. A pair who are barred for this should ask for an appeal, if it can be done before the event is over (i.e. between sessions). Otherwise a talk with the SO or club management could be appropriate.

The English Bridge Union rules state that:-

"A partnership may play two basic systems at different positions or vulnerabilities only in Level 4 or Level 5 competitions, and only where rounds are of 7 boards or more. The partnership must display two system cards for each system, indicating the occasions when the different systems apply."

I don't know what other national bodies state, but I suspect they would be similar.

[Vampyr]

GrahamJson, on 2017-October-11, 07:26, said:

The English Bridge Union rules state that:-

"A partnership may play two basic systems at different positions or vulnerabilities only in Level 4 or Level 5 competitions, and only where rounds are of 7 boards or more. The partnership must display two system cards for each system, indicating the occasions when the different systems apply."

I don't know what other national bodies state, but I suspect they would be similar.

LOL reading the quoted post let me see all the typos!

Anyway, I was under the impression that you could use different systems for any length rounds. Of course you can always change between rounds, so maybe you would decide based on the positions/vulnerability you would face each round. So you could choose Precision if the opponents were vulnerable on both boards, or two out of three.