[deerhaven]

Does anyone have details on a modified Jac 2N response
structure?

I believe the one I want is something like this.

3C: any min except 5332 with no A/K outside, >3D: asks >
3H: shows void, then 3S: relays to ask again> 3S: shows
OM stiff

3D: any non-min with shortness, >3H: asks, >3S: shows
void, then >3N: relays to ask again, >3N (after 3H): shows OM stiff

3M: 6+ no shortness, non-min

3OM: 5422, non-min > next step: asks

3N: 5332 non-min

4C/4D/4OM: good second suit

4M: 5332 with no A/K outside

[inquiry]

There are a lot of them around. Marty Bergen has one that isn't too bad, buy his books or someone might type in in here.

I like the ETM victory method so much (see http://www.bridgematters.com/jplus.htm ) I not only play that, I have converted my opener jump rebid to show similar hand in support of responders major with essentially the same response scheme.

[han]

Search for "jacoby 2NT" or something similar here of BBOforum and you'll get lots of ideas.

[whereagles]

I've studied most of the J2NT schemes around and concluded most of them are not good at all. Mostly because neither of them limit opener or responder's hand in a consistent and clear-cut way.

Still, the best scheme is probably that of Martel/Stansby. It's very precise and systematic, but, since it requires responder to have a GF hand, it never seems to come up.

[reisig]

I like 2N to be limit or better (GF but non-slam is possible). Then the opponents don't have a "free" shot bidding at 3 level for leads or saves, since we may not bid game. Also opener does not disclose a short suit to make the defense easier. Opener's rebids are all artificial (exc 3 our Maj = worst). For slam hands (responder) uses a good 2/1 method to find out what they need to know. Opener has ways to show a slam interest hand and we can investigate from there.

[mila85]

What do you think about this:

1♠-3♠ block
1♠-3x mini-spliner (inv+)
1♠-2♣ can be any balanced GF even with fit
1♠-2nt is 9-11 balanced with 4c fit or invitblock - good 6-9 (8-81/2 loosers ) with 4c fit

After minispliner
3♠ minimum, I don't like your splinter
4♠ some extra values (but I don't like your splinter) or minimum and no values in partner's suit
other is slam-try

After 2nt:

3♣ is invit (vs. weak unbalanced), ask shorness
Then:
3x shorness
3♠ club shorness
3nt balanced maximum
4x Hxxxxx or HHxxx
4♠ balanced mimimum

3♦ invit
Then:
3♥ balanced minimum
3♠ unbalanced
3NT balanced maximum

3♥ natural

3♠ no game interest

3NT pass with balanced hand or bid 4♠ with unbalanced

1♥-2NT is spade splinter and 1♥-2♠ is balanced invit/invitblock

[errline]

reisig, on Aug 16 2005, 07:18 AM, said:

I like 2N to be limit or better (GF but non-slam is possible). Then the opponents don't have a "free" shot bidding at 3 level for leads or saves, since we may not bid game. For slam hands (responder) uses a good 2/1 method to find out what they need to know. Opener has ways to show a slam interest hand and we can investigate from there.

So with slam interest responder would always 2/1? I'd be really grateful for a brief description of followups and of your 2/1 methods, though I understand if too complicated for this forum.

Although Bergen raises and Jacoby 2NT or some variant thereof are the de facto standard for younger 2/1 players here, a friend and I had rejected the idea of jumping with 4-card single-raises, and we also decided there is no reason that 2NT can't be limit-or-better.

An idea I got from this forum, as noone I know plays that method.

Recenty we were working out methods for it, similar to Mila85's, but with 2NT showing nearly all balanced limit-or-better 4+ card raises (even if slammish). We use Serious 3NT in 2/1 auctions, and it seems easy to meld that into this structure. With unbalanced hands responder would either 2/1 (with a good 5+ card outside suit) or would splinter (possibly with two game-going splinter strength ranges available).

We were trying to do something logical and simple expanding on the ideas of Serious 3NT and simple game tries that would work like this:

Opener and responder, with minimums, each attempt to sign off at the 3 level; other 3-level bids below 3 of our major show extras and are at least game try or counter-game-try fragments; and a balanced 15-17 opener would bid 3NT over 2NT; each side is required to give a courtesy cue if the other has not limited his hand; each can keep bidding to show slam interest and clarify previous bids, and each can sign off in game once slam interest is denied by partner.

[coyot]

I like Hardy raises (but I know only some modified version):

2NT is any support, 16+
3♣ is limit raise with 3-card and shortness or 4-card without shortness
3♦ is limit raise with 4 card and shortness (minisplinter)
3 in other major is 12-15 with 4 card and shortness (minisplinter)
3NT is 12-15 with 3card without shortness
4♣ is 12-15 with 4+card and no shortness, promising 2 of AKQ in trump suit in 4card or 1 of AK in 5card
4♦ is 12-15 with 4+card and no shortness, denying the good trumps (0-1 of 3 tophonors in 4card, 0 of 2 tophonors in 5card.)

That leaves limit raise with 3-card without shortness (bid via forcing 1NT)
and 12-15 with 3-card with shortness (bid via 2/1 GF).

The only thing requiring agreement afterwards is how to ask for the shortness, but there is nothing too complicated in it (usually you ask with +1 and use NT or trump suit to show shortness in the farthest suit to save space.)

The simplest alternative I've played and liked was:
3card limit raise via forcing NT
4card limit raise or better or 3card GF via 2NT
3card with a really good side suit via 2/1.

After 2NT, 3M balanced minimum, 4M balanced, enough to accept 4card invit, 3NT balanced stronger (15+), new suit jump void, new suit non-jump fragment (promising a singleton in one of the remaining suits.

This seemed quite playable, but the approach of describing declarer's hand is not a good idea when playing against good opponents, so I switched to Hardy, which is basically suited to keep as much information hidden as possible, unless you really need it (promising SOME singleton, partner does not have to ask...)

[glen]

In ETM Gold Premium, responder's hand type is narrowly defined to allow more bounces to 4M by opener. The structure is:

2NT: Limit or game going with 4+ trumps, if limit then a singleton/void, if game going no singleton/void and not 15/16+.

3♣: Constructive to Limit with 4+ trumps, if limit then no singleton/void.

3♦: 4+ trumps, either 0-5 or 15/16+ with no singleton or GF with minor suit void and/or great ♦ suit. If responder has 0-5, the opponents will let you know.

3M: 4+ trumps, about 4/5 to 7 - semi-preemptive but some values so opponents don't have a free ticket into the show (also 4/5 to 7 more frequent than super weak).

3OM: Singleton/void in OM.

3NT: Transfer splinter to ♣s.

4♣: Transfer splinter to ♦s.

1♥-4♦: Raise to 4♥ with some values and singleton ♠.

1♠-4♦: Either completely bust raise to 4♠ or game going hand with spread out values that wants to make opponents guess which. 4♥ by opener asks which.

1♠-4♥: Minor suit void, with a raise to 4♠ (so some but not lots of HCP).

4M: Some values, usually not singleton ♠ if 4♥, no void minor if 4♠. Hand shape definition is to allow opener to know when to double or bid on if the opponents now come in.

[Double !]

Glen:

I have the "old" notes from your ETM/ Bridge Matters site on Jacoby+ where it says limit raise or better, or 16+. It's the 16+ that I am having difficulty understanding. Am/ was I correct in assuming that you meant a balanced 16+ like the old Baron 2NT, or did you meant a different type of hand. The rebids that you suggested should opener rebid 3C (wouldn't accept game try) are reasonably clear. However, the follow-up bids should opener rebid 3 diamonds or something else are quite unclear to me. Perhaps I am missing something.

I would appreciate it if you could clarify this, or have you scrapped the 16+ part of the convention, at least as far as ETM Tops is concerned? Thanks in advance.

DHL:

[glen]

Double !, on Aug 17 2005, 07:12 PM, said:

Glen:

I have the "old" notes from your ETM/ Bridge Matters site on Jacoby+ where it says limit raise or better, or 16+.  It's the 16+ that I am having difficulty understanding.  Am/ was I correct in assuming that you meant a balanced 16+ like the old Baron 2NT, or did you meant a different type of hand.  The rebids that you suggested should opener rebid 3C (wouldn't accept game try) are reasonably clear.  However, the follow-up bids should opener rebid 3 diamonds or something else are quite unclear to me.  Perhaps I am missing something.

I would appreciate it if you could clarify this, or have you scrapped the 16+ part of the convention, at least as far as ETM Tops is concerned?  Thanks in advance.

DHL:

The Jacoby Plus (referenced above in a post - thanks!) didn’t not have an upper limit – as Richie (reisig) notes it is better to put an upper limit on it.

In ETM Tops (and other versions of systems) we put the any 4-3-3-3 & 16+ hand type into the 2NT bid so that the opponents could not come in easily without risk of being doubled. The 2NT bid had no upper limit (if 4-3-3-3 or not) in ETM Tops, which was okay since we bid a lot of 1M-4M on game going hands opposite the limited opening bids. However the 16 was the lower limit for the 4-3-3-3 hands, given the opening bids started at 8.