[lamford]

---

You play that 3NT shows a short-suit slam-try (almost certainly in a minor), and your methods now for better or worse are that 4C accepts short clubs, 4D accepts short diamonds, 4H shows wastage in bothe minors and 4NT would be RKCB. 4S would show a void. What is your choice?

[cherdano]

I would start by reminding myself of the agreed range for 2NT when having a short suit.

[lamford]

cherdano, on 2016-December-01, 17:54, said:

I would start by reminding myself of the agreed range for 2NT when having a short suit.

We just play any game-force, too good to splinter (which would be around 8-11).

[cherdano]

OK. I think I am just about worth 4C. Good problem.

[gordontd]

cherdano, on 2016-December-02, 04:30, said:

OK. I think I am just about worth 4C. Good problem.

Really? Your club holding is worth nothing opposite shortage but your diamond holding rates to produce a trick 50% of the time opposite a singleton. I think I would just bid 4H but if I were to do something more encouraging it would be to bid 4D.

[Cyberyeti]

gordontd, on 2016-December-02, 04:58, said:

Really? Your club holding is worth nothing opposite shortage but your diamond holding rates to produce a trick 50% of the time opposite a singleton. I think I would just bid 4H but if I were to do something more encouraging it would be to bid 4D.

As little as Axxx, Qxxx, AQxx, x will make slam decent, I think you need more with a stiff diamond, eg with the minors reversed you need ♣AKxx.

Your diamond trick may well only be useful for throwing a winner on

[nullve]

4♣. My hand isn't magically worse than x-AKJxx-Kxxx-xxx.

[Kaitlyn S]

nullve, on 2016-December-02, 12:47, said:

4♣. My hand isn't magically worse than x-AKJxx-Kxxx-xxx.

Is that a good hand when you've already shown a singleton spade?

I am assuming a framework where the opening bid shows 13-21ish. If the pair is playing Precision, this is a good hand.

[nullve]

Kaitlyn S, on 2016-December-02, 13:04, said:

Is that a good hand when you've already shown a singleton spade?

Clearly, the method isn't working properly if I have to bid the same way with

♠x ♥AKJxx ♦Kxxx ♣xxx (no C wastage)

as with

♠x ♥AKJxx ♦xxxx ♣Kxx (C wastage),

but I agree that bidding 4♣ with the former hand might be too encouraging if partner doesn't have Last Train (4♦) available.

[lamford]

nullve, on 2016-December-02, 15:14, said:

Clearly, the method isn't working properly if I have to bid the same way with

♠x ♥AKJxx ♦Kxxx ♣xxx (no C wastage)

as with

♠x ♥AKJxx ♦xxxx ♣Kxx (C wastage),

but I agree that bidding 4♣ with the former hand might be too encouraging if partner doesn't have Last Train (4♦) available.

Some good players I asked thought I should have bid 4C/4D because I have good trumps.Partner had AKJTx QTxx Axx x and we missed slam when I signed off in 4H.

[Cyberyeti]

lamford, on 2016-December-03, 12:55, said:

Some good players I asked thought I should have bid 4C/4D because I have good trumps.Partner had AKJTx QTxx Axx x and we missed slam when I signed off in 4H.

We would bid this relatively easily after a 1♥-2♠ start, it's awkward when you have no idea of partner's shape in the long suits, if he has a spade less and a diamond more it's much less good.

[lamford]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-December-03, 13:38, said:

We would bid this relatively easily after a 1♥-2♠ start, it's awkward when you have no idea of partner's shape in the long suits, if he has a spade less and a diamond more it's much less good.

Sadly, 1H-2S in our methods was weak so that was ruled out. 1H-1S was possible of course, and there is something to be said for that route.

[ggwhiz]

lamford, on 2016-December-03, 12:55, said:

Some good players I asked thought I should have bid 4C/4D because I have good trumps.Partner had AKJTx QTxx Axx x and we missed slam when I signed off in 4H.

I'm not a fan of the methods that with responder being captain after 2nt switching to crew with that 3nt bid. A simple and traditional cue bidding auction does the job and if that's not available (is it?), RKC by responder (gamble on the spade winners) seems called for unless you open real trash.

If this method is going to work I suggest that responders 3nt bid should not be this hand. Perhaps turning the ♠K into the ♠Q? making it the mildest of slam tries since opener is still unlimited. Having BOTH partners unlimited at this level is a bad idea.

[WesleyC]

Most of the problems stem from the fact that both hands are still unlimited after the 3S bid.

A really simple improvement to basic Jacoby 2NT uses 3C to show an artificial minimum. If you like simplicity, you can keep the other responses exactly the same - a new suit shows shortage and a non-minimum, including 4C. If you show a minimum and responder is still interested in finding out about shortage they can bid 3D as an enquiry.

The main advantage of this method is that you avoid giving away information to the defense on hands where responder has no slam interest opposite a minimum, but it also has significant advantages in slam auctions by slowing the auction down and allowing opener to put their hand in a range.

Using this method I would respond 3S showing non-minimum and spade shortage. After stretching the first time I can now happily sign off on the next round having shown partner that I have at least a bit extra.

[Jinksy]

lamford, on 2016-December-03, 12:55, said:

Some good players I asked thought I should have bid 4C/4D because I have good trumps.Partner had AKJTx QTxx Axx x and we missed slam when I signed off in 4H.

I'm sure we've seen similar hands with e.g. spades and diamonds reversed where bidding the strong side suit was the heavy favourite among stronger players. At the one level it might be more fiddly to set up a subsequent game force, but this hand has so much potential power I think it can look after itself (and has more room to do so). If P rebids anything but 1N or 2♣ (or if the opps start bidding clubs aggressively), you can almost force to slam, and over either of those calls you can presumably set up a GF with your next bid.

[wank]

all shortage showing bids should be limited (or slam drive) or have space remaining for serious/non-serious.

[Winstonm]

Partner's short suit has not improved my hand, has in fact, detracted from it. 4H.

[cherdano]

Winstonm, on 2016-December-05, 16:03, said:

Partner's short suit has not improved my hand, has in fact, detracted from it. 4H.

And if you had x AKJxx Kxxx xxx you would encourage opposite club shortage since it would improve your hand?

[cherdano]

I don't get all the complaints about methods. Yes you can incorporate ranges at a lower level. But with the given system, both partners were able to show their shortage - which can be quite helpful on some hand.

wank, on 2016-December-05, 13:45, said:

all shortage showing bids should be limited (or slam drive) or have space remaining for serious/non-serious.

Partner is reasonably limited. He has more than a direct splinter (8-11). And we can assume he doesn't have enough to drive to the 5-level himself opposite spade shortness.

[Winstonm]

cherdano, on 2016-December-05, 16:16, said:

And if you had x AKJxx Kxxx xxx you would encourage opposite club shortage since it would improve your hand?

Yes. In fact, on the given hand the heart suit is improved - but I don't think that is quite enough to encourage. Do you?