BBO Discussion Forums: Grand - 7S or NT? - BBO Discussion Forums

2N = jacoby
3N = heart shortage and "extras"

Club game, 2210 was a cold top but I'm thinking IMPS and want to play this in 7N, how should I be thinking?

That jumping from 3NT to 6♠ burns a lot of space...

hrothgar, on 2014-September-17, 14:29, said:

okay, let's pretend partner bid 4NKC and then 6S

There is a lot to be said about 2 NT start instead of 2♦ and then jump to 6 ♠. How would you bid over 6♠ with

Kxxxx
A
KJT9
AKx

I wouldn't, we would be having a different discussion

That 2N is a misbid.

What is wrong with a natural, forcing, 2♦?

As the bidding developed, neither partner had even the remotest hope of counting 13 top winners without ruffs.

I am not saying that 2♦ always gets you there, because it would be nice to have the diamond Q. I don't think opener can quite 'lie' about that card, since N has promised (in most methods) only 5 (some might even say 4 is permissible but not me....I'd rather bid a 3 card club suit than a 4 card diamond suit).

However, once N gets a vigorous diamond raise, then there is some remote possibility that he will be able to 'count' 6 diamonds, 5 spades and 2 Aces.

However, this reminds me of your other current thread in which I commented that one should not worry too much about coming up with auctions to justify a spectacular result. I don't, fwiw, like any part of your actual auction beyond the 1♠opening, but even with what seems to me to be a more sensible start, I would be happy with 7♠

jillybean, on 2014-September-17, 14:44, said:

Then you would pass, because partner's 6S bid would show that you were missing a keycard. With all the keycards and potential interest in grand, partner must bid something else, usually 5NT.

4NT would be the wrong bid too, it's very rarely right to bid blackwood with a void, as the answer won't help you. A 4C cue would be better, although I'm not sure you'd reach the grand.

I don't objet to 2♦ but A-empty isn't spectacular and my main fear is that we are never gong to convince partner that we have 4 card AT9x raise in spades after a 2♦ start.

1♠ 2♦
3♦ 3♠
4♦ ?


I'm very happy with this result, I'm not sure I would be so happy playing IMPs but perhaps i should be. deleted nonsense

jillybean, on 2014-September-17, 15:07, said:

What's wrong with 7S at IMPs?

MickyB, on 2014-September-17, 15:26, said:

Nothing, forget that.

mikeh, on 2014-September-17, 14:52, said:

Curious: do others feel the same? My instinct matches jillybean's - with 4-card support for P, I'd very rarely bid a side suit first.

Why even in 7? Is at best 52% and probably worse, hardly a cold grand.

steve2005, on 2014-September-17, 16:24, said:

Look a lot better than that. You can guarantee five spade tricks, and will only go off if you misguess who has the diamond void. Seems around 89% to me. A little more, as you will play the person for longer spades for the void in diamonds.

Jinksy, on 2014-September-17, 15:49, said:

Some issues include:

1. Jacoby auctions, at least initially, are question and answer, and can't usually turn into cooperative dialogues until a high level and maybe not even then. There are many hands on which this works well, but in my experience they tend not to do very well when responder has a suit such as AJxxx or KQxxx or KJxxx. The problem isn't (usually) in game decisions but, rather, in slam and grand slam decisions, which usually entail more than just making sure we don't have quick losers. We'd like to know we don't have slow losers and/or we need to count winners.

Say we hold AJxxx and we bid 2/1 and partner raises. In a sophisticated partnership we will eventually be able to find out about the KQ of that suit as well as the AKQ of the major. Say he has Kxx in the suit. Well, given that we have 4 trump and this 5 card side suit, we probably don't have any pitch for his third card in the suit and we have a loser. Try identifying that on a Jacoby sequence.

Conversely, say we have Axxxx and partner doesn't raise. Now, if partner cues the King, we can (usually) place him with either stiff K or Kx, and in either case we have not only no loser but a chance, especially with Kx, of being able to establish an extra trick or two in the suit by ruffing. Again, try finding out his holding in most Jacoby structures.

2. In addition to inferences, or specific information, about holdings, letting partner know that we have length and strength in a side suit will cause him to appropriately upgrade good holdings and downgrade poor ones. When I am looking at Ax or Kx in a suit in which my partner makes a 2/1 and then shows me primary major support, I tend to get very optimistic in my hand valuation. When I hold xxx, I tend to get cautious.

3. While this is rare, there will be times when 3rd hand interferes. My own style these days is that when the opps start 1M 2N, as 3rd seat I strain to bid. I will come in on almost any decent suit....the other day I overcalled 3♦ on KQJ109. Now, it was favourable, but my point is that very few players have any firm agreements as to how to handle interference. This means, especially if 2nd seat can raise the ante, or 3rd seat has a 4 level pre-empt, that it may be very, very useful for opener to have some idea of whether a double-fit exists.


These seem to me to be the main reasons why one should avoid the simplistic J2N weapon when holding a potential source of tricks in a 5 card or longer suit. Note that the arguments don't apply with similar force to side 4 card suits, especially since good jacoby methods allow for the finding of, and playing in when appropriate, of 4-4 side fits.

I am not saying that one should never use J2N with a side 5+ suit, but to my mind the suit had better be very good, such that we don't care about the difference, for example, between Kx and Kxx or xx and xxx.

jillybean, on 2014-September-17, 14:16, said:

Must admit I also would start with 2nt rather than 2d.

What are your options over 2nt by opener?

Being able to show a non minimum 2 suiter over 2nt should be an option.

Another option is to show the club void if possible over 1s but that may not get you to 7nt.

deleted

I certainly disagree with the 2NT bid on this hand. A far better bid is 2D to allow partner to evaluate any D length and strength. 2NT seems weird to me on this hand. Mikeh explains the reasoning well. I do not understand the rationale for not showing a possible source of tricks for the benefit of misusing a gadget because I have one. 2NT is just a bad bid imo.

Reaching a grand here is not automatic. I'd be happy to reach one, regardless of strain.

I am curious why 3NT in response to partners asking bid shows short H and extras, is this a special agreement?

While I also prefer a 2D response I also feel that a direct Jacoby is not so horrible as often partner will be short in D rather than H which is very nice for the asking hand. A good rule of thumb is even when holding 4 card major support, never pass up showing a trick taking 5 card suit. Mike offers good advice with his post.

lamford, on 2014-September-17, 16:28, said:

Amusingly, it might be higher than 90% if we had a proper auction to uncover the big diamond fit. When we land in 7S, and they Lightner, we can now convert to 7NT with the extra knowledge to pick up the Diamond suit. If no lightner, the opening leader could be played for the possible void.

Will pay off when opening leader has the void and his partner bluffs the double