[ahydra]

Needs a lot of system discussion to agree how to show long spade hands with various ranges. There are three main approaches:

a) 1x-2S is played as WJS ~4-8, 1x-1S; 2y-2S is ~9-11 and 3S is GF SI
b) 1x-2S is played as a very weak WJS, 1x-1S; 2y-2S is still ~6-9, and then 3S is needed as INV
c) 1x-2S is played as strong, then 1x-1S; 2y-3S is INV ("Standard Acol")

Also you need to agree how you play 1x-4S and 1x-1S; 2y-4S. For me the second shows something like this South hand - a hand based on values and long spades rather than weak with shape and long spades. As such 1x-1S; 2y-4SF; 3z-3S is normally considered to have SI (fairly serious, not just mild SI), since with a simple GF strength hand responder just rebids 4S. [Hmm, what about ...4SF; 3z-4S?]

So it's a question of whether you think the South hand is good enough to show slam interest. I think it needs a bit more (add the HK, say), but after 1D-1S; 2C-4S, North should still consider moving with the wonderful spade support and red aces. He might worry that South holds e.g. 7411, but life's too short. Perhaps his best option is to offer 5C, trying to elicit 5D from South to fill in the diamonds. After he does hear 5D he can sign off in 6S because if South held SAK, DK and CA he would have gone via 4SF.

ahydra

[miamijd]

JanisW, on 2017-October-18, 15:01, said:

Thank you all for your insights.
I conclude that S should've bid 2H 4SF, though some expressed the thought that 3S is not a serious underbid, as it is gameforcing opposite almost any ordinary opener.
Is the S-Hand really a 4SF followed by the stronger ♠-bid (which would be 3♠) after all it's a 6 Looser Hand with a horrible ♥-holding?

With S failing to make a gf-bid, N has more difficulty to bid the 4♥-cue. But I guess he cannot be much better in context and should at least give S the good news, that he has serious extras for the bidding so far.

I would've expected N to do more.

Thanks
JW

In bridge, ya gotta bid your games. The South hand has to force to game opposite an opening bid -- period. If partner has a spade void and a bunch of minor junk, so be it. But treating this hand as invitational is, in the long run, losing bridge. To ask North to do anything other than bid 4S over an invite is silly, because South shouldn't have this hand and invite. If South has what I think is a good invite given the auction:

AKJxxx
xxx
Jx
Qx

you'll be in trouble, as 5S may well fail.

South should make a GF bid (seems like that's 4SF then spades in your system, as it is in most 2/1 systems) and not bid 4S over 2C. 4S over 2C should deny a side A or K and just show really good spades (better than South actually has).

Cheers,
mike

[Cyberyeti]

miamijd, on 2017-October-18, 19:14, said:

In bridge, ya gotta bid your games. The South hand has to force to game opposite an opening bid -- period. If partner has a spade void and a bunch of minor junk, so be it. But treating this hand as invitational is, in the long run, losing bridge. To ask North to do anything other than bid 4S over an invite is silly, because South shouldn't have this hand and invite. If South has what I think is a good invite given the auction:

AKJxxx
xxx
Jx
Qx

you'll be in trouble, as 5S may well fail.

South should make a GF bid (seems like that's 4SF then spades in your system, as it is in most 2/1 systems) and not bid 4S over 2C. 4S over 2C should deny a side A or K and just show really good spades (better than South actually has).

Cheers,
mike

I wouldn't bid 3♠ with this suit, 3♠ should be a suit partner is confident raising to 4 with a small singleton and where you are confident spades is a better fit than either minor which you can't be here. Add the 10♠ and it's closer. You still need quite a lot to go wrong for 5♠ to fail.

[S V Bhide]

I wonder why some players objected to 3 Sp. What is wrong with first jump= slasm possibility and 2nd round game force.With this unerstanding since N is slightly better than for game should have bid 4 H as cue. S V Bhide

[S V Bhide]

I wonder why some players objected to 3 Sp. What is wrong with first jump= slasm possibility and 2nd round game force.With this unerstanding since N is slightly better than for game should have bid 4 H as cue. S V Bhide

[Cyberyeti]

S V Bhide, on 2017-October-19, 04:36, said:

I wonder why some players objected to 3 Sp. What is wrong with first jump= slasm possibility and 2nd round game force.With this unerstanding since N is slightly better than for game should have bid 4 H as cue. S V Bhide

Because the OP stated 3♠ was not completely forcing in their system

[maartenxq]

As 1 ♦- 2 ♠ is weak nowadays people tend to forget how to bid their strong 1 suiters.
xyz i one solution, but does not apply here. 4th suit would be alternative, but you could also agree that 3 ♠ is forcing.
1 ♦ - 3 ♠ would be 6+ and invitational in this approach. As it went I think north should surely bid 4 ♥.

Maarten Baltussen

[P_Marlowe]

JanisW, on 2017-October-18, 15:01, said:

<snip>
I conclude that S should've bid 2H 4SF, though some expressed the thought that 3S is not a serious underbid, as it is gameforcing opposite almost any ordinary opener.
<snip>

The question to answer is, how wide is the range of hands, that can bid 3S.
Traditionnally you have a description of 6+ and 10-12, keeping in mind, that the 10-12 may already
include some distributional points.
If you play constructive WJO, than you can make a rebid by responder forcing, and the number of invitational
strength hands, that go via this route can increase.
Also "almost any ordinary opener", ..., if opener has xx in spades, the suit will make 7 tricks 50%+ of the
time, how is opener supposed to know this? The 7th card is big.
It is comparable to the 4th card facing a 5 card major opener, peoble try to get the info across, that they
have a 9 card fit.
In other words, I would keep the set of hands tight, that go via the 3S route, and if I do this, it is quite
clear, that opener has only the option to raise or pass, if he holds at most strong NT strength.

But as I have already said, we are approaching judgement call land, and I will never discuss judgement calls,
just say, that this would not be my choice, for what ever worth this may be to you.

[mrt2000]

Hmmm, I'm just wondering exactly how good a contract 6♠ actually is. If you get a ♥ lead and ♠ are 3-1 then unless ♦ are very favourable I fancy you'll go off in 6♠. Even if ♠ are 2-2 it's still far from laydown. Perhaps not such a good slam after all.

[JanisW]

mrt2000, on 2017-October-19, 05:33, said:

Hmmm, I'm just wondering exactly how good a contract 6♠ actually is. If you get a ♥ lead and ♠ are 3-1 then unless ♦ are very favourable I fancy you'll go off in 6♠. Even if ♠ are 2-2 it's still far from laydown. Perhaps not such a good slam after all.

slam is excellent even on a ♥lead and ♠ 3-1.
You'll only need ♦ no worse then 4-2 and the doubleton ♦ opposite the ♠-single.
1. ♥A
2. ♦ to K
3. ♥ruff
4. ♦ to J
5. ♥ ruff
6. A♦ discard ♣ and if ruffed, it usually was the 3 bagger. If there was one in the first place

Slam is not cold obviously but decent.

We play wSJ so
1♠ followed by 2♠ is inv.
1♠ followed by 4♠ is game obviously
1♠ followed by 4SF and 3 ♠ is gf with slaminterest.
leaving [1SP] followed by 3♠ as almost gf, top of inv. range needing just a little help, that could be
- Primary honours (preferably A) in the other suits and not QJs as they tend to be wasted
- something useful in ♠
The suit-quality is just a tiny bit too weak to bid 4♠ directly in particular if you have 3♠ available.

The question is whether South has the strongest possible 3♠ bid or the weakest possible 4SF. I understand that both camps have their point.

The same seems to be true for North. Does he have the strongest possible "only 4♠-bid" or the weakest possible 4♥-bid? I guess a 3rd spade or the A♣ instead of the K would surely make 4♥ the clear favorite.

If one went with the stronger option the other would've always followed.

regards
JW

[P_Marlowe]

JanisW, on 2017-October-19, 07:14, said:

<snip>
We play wSJ so
1♠ followed by 2♠ is inv.
1♠ followed by 4♠ is game obviously
1♠ followed by 4SF and 3 ♠ is gf with slaminterest.
leaving [1SP] followed by 3♠ as almost gf, top of inv. range needing just a little help, that could be
- Primary honours (preferably A) in the other suits and not QJs as they tend to be wasted
- something useful in ♠
The suit-quality is just a tiny bit too weak to bid 4♠ directly in particular if you have 3♠ available.
<snip>

If you play 2♠ as inv. (*), than 3♠ is gf, it is usually used for choice of games to allow to decide,
if 3NT or 4 ♠ is better, the route via 4SF showes SI, but is also setting trumps.
Assuming this agreement in place, than 3S is perfect, and I ok with a cue by opener, in case partner has magic
cards, I am still not convinced that you will reach 6S in a controlled manner, but at least it is a reasonable start.

(*) This may be a matter of words / understanding: for me a inv. 2♠ is showing 10-12, not 7/8-10.
The main difference is the strength of the WJO, is it crap, say 4-7, or is is 6-9.

[GrahamJson]

The 2/1 system used in the Bridge Magazine Bidding Challenge is claimed to be based on current expert practice. In this situation it uses;

Jump to 2S = weak
1S followed by 2S = constructive
1S followed by 3S = Game force
All fourth suit bids = Game force

Using this method the 3S rebid is about right.

[iandayre]

JanisW, on 2017-October-17, 06:22, said:

It is something like: if you do not have any excuse, you will have to bid game.

Well this is your real problem. 3S should be clearly invitational, not forcing. If there is any confusion on that, both are to blame. S hand is worth a force, should bid 4th suit.

[marklaf]

I believe this is a hand that partners should talk about. For me a 3 spade jump is quite strong(only pass if you opened a real dog) so in that context I believe partner should cue bid.

[miamijd]

GrahamJson, on 2017-October-19, 09:05, said:

The 2/1 system used in the Bridge Magazine Bidding Challenge is claimed to be based on current expert practice. In this situation it uses;

Jump to 2S = weak
1S followed by 2S = constructive
1S followed by 3S = Game force
All fourth suit bids = Game force

Using this method the 3S rebid is about right.

This is NOT a normal structure and it stinks, to boot. Let's say you have:

KJT9xx xx Kx xxx

What are you supposed to do here after 1D? Make a WJS? I sure hope not. This hand is way too strong for that. Lose the KC and you have a WJS.

OK, so you bid 1S and partner bids 2C. Now what? 2S is an invite? Then you have no bid! If you're saying 2S shows this hand, then what do you do with

KJT9xx xx Ax Kxx

That's an invite; what can I do with it? Can't bid 2S; can't bid 3S; can't use 4th suit.

I know of no structure where BOTH the second round jump AND fourth suit are GF. Can't be.

In addition, I know of no "Bridge Magazine" Challenge the Champs. I think you mean "The Bridge World." In Bridge World Standard:

After a one-level new-suit response and opener's simple new-suit rebid:
(a) two notrump or three of any suit previously bid is invitational;
(b) a fourth-suit bid at the two- or three-level is forcing to game;

...

This makes sense. The 3S bid is an invite; 4SF is GF.

Cheers,
mike

[GrahamJson]

I mean Bridge Magazine http://bridgemagazine.co.uk

From their system description:

“Jump shifts are weak at the two-level and invitational at the three-level. Bidding and rebidding a suit is invitational, bidding and jump rebidding a suit is FG.”

There are twenty expert players on the bidding panel from around the world, including Mike Lawrence amongst others.

Until the end of 2015 the BM system used a jump rebid as invitational. If I remember rightly several panelists complained that this was not in line with modern expert practice, hence it was changed to GF, along with many other fundamental changes.

[Zelandakh]

miamijd, on 2017-October-19, 17:39, said:

KJT9xx xx Kx xxx

What are you supposed to do here after 1D? Make a WJS? I sure hope not. This hand is way too strong for that. Lose the KC and you have a WJS.

This goes back a little to nomenclature. There are 2 schools of thought concerning WJSs. The first, which you appear to follow, is that cover a range of approximately 3-7. In this case an additional (constructive) range is required in addition to normal invites. The other school of thought is for hands to retain their traditional structure (weak/INV/GF) and for a WJS just to be in the bottom range, so about 6-b10. It sounds from Graham's quote as though BMS uses the second method, which would make this hand not too strong.