[jillybean]

---

[akwoo]

I really wished you played 3♦ as showing no shortness with extras, but...

Given what you're playing, I think you have to bid 4♦ here - give partner a good minimum Axx xxxxx Axx Ax and 5♥ is odds against (well a T or 9 in hearts might bring you above 50%).

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

you are not strong enough to go beyond game, the Ace of club is nice, but you are still
only one Ace stronger than a min 2NT force, so 4D accepting a sign off in 4D.

To a certain degree, you did limit your hand by bypassing 3H, the question is how much,
and so did opener by bypassing 3NT ( or showing add. values, depending on agreement ).

With kind regards
Marlowe

[jillybean]

Changing agreements to cater for one hand is forbidden but perhaps we need to review our 2nt agreements.

Playing standard, 3♥, no shortage but extra's.

---

[mw64ahw]

How you define extras? - if 14 balanced then you are unlikely to have enough, if 16 then you have 32 between you. I'm still guessing here, but wont make a move beyond 4♥. Is 4♦ last train?

[jillybean]

Extras ~16, no last train

[akwoo]

Seattle expert standard is:

1M - 2N

3C - all minimums, after which 3D asks for shortness, responses 3H=club shortness, 3S=diamond shortness, 3N=other major shortness, anything higher=no shortness
3D - extras, no shortness
3H - extras, club shortness
3S - extras, diamond shortness
3N - extras, other major shortness

There are variations incorporating limit raises and overstrength splinters into 2N. Some folks use 1H-2S for an extra step.

[mw64ahw]

jillybean, on 2024-October-11, 09:50, said:

Extras ~16, no last train

In which case you need to look for the slam and depending on your methods can either ask or show keycards or bid 4♦.
I have a preference for showing odd keycards via 5♣, but a 4♠/4N ask works OK here.

[jillybean]

akwoo, on 2024-October-11, 10:21, said:

Seattle expert standard is:

1M - 2N

3C - all minimums, after which 3D asks for shortness, responses 3H=club shortness, 3S=diamond shortness, 3N=other major shortness, anything higher=no shortness
3D - extras, no shortness
3H - extras, club shortness
3S - extras, diamond shortness
3N - extras, other major shortness

There are variations incorporating limit raises and overstrength splinters into 2N. Some folks use 1H-2S for an extra step.

Thanks This is definitely an improvement on what I currently play.
3C minimum with shortness
3D any hand w/o shortness
rest is the same

[jillybean]

Everyone likes to name these treatments. Akwoo, does it have a name, or can I call it Woo?

1M - 2N

3C - all minimums, after which 3D asks for shortness, responses 3H=club shortness, 3S=diamond shortness, 3N=other major shortness, anything higher=no shortness
3D - extras, no shortness
3H - extras, club shortness
3S - extras, diamond shortness
3N - extras, other major shortness

[jdiana]

akwoo, on 2024-October-11, 10:21, said:

Seattle expert standard is:

1M - 2N

3C - all minimums, after which 3D asks for shortness, responses 3H=club shortness, 3S=diamond shortness, 3N=other major shortness, anything higher=no shortness
3D - extras, no shortness
3H - extras, club shortness
3S - extras, diamond shortness
3N - extras, other major shortness

There are variations incorporating limit raises and overstrength splinters into 2N. Some folks use 1H-2S for an extra step.

When you say "anything higher=no shortness", is 4M by opener an acceptable rebid? Opener has denied having extras by not bidding 3D.
What would, e.g., 4m mean in that situation?
Have you eliminated the 4-level rebid showing a good 5-card suit or is that still available to opener as an initial rebid after 2N?

I don't mean to cross-examine you - just trying to understand this b/c it looks promising. Probably easier to remember than some of the other alternatives I've seen.

Thanks!

[akwoo]

jdiana, on 2024-October-13, 16:04, said:

When you say "anything higher=no shortness", is 4M by opener an acceptable rebid? Opener has denied having extras by not bidding 3D.
What would, e.g., 4m mean in that situation?
Have you eliminated the 4-level rebid showing a good 5-card suit or is that still available to opener as an initial rebid after 2N?

I don't mean to cross-examine you - just trying to understand this b/c it looks promising. Probably easier to remember than some of the other alternatives I've seen.

Thanks!

Anything higher=A/K (well - a control bid, but you're denying shortness). I've never thought about it too much, but I suppose control bids below 4M should be mandatory here, so 4M denies any side controls (well 1H-2N-3C-3D-4H could have a spade control).

Do keep in mind a 3D bid implies wanting to know about shortness for slam purposes, so it's a hand that could visualize a minimum hand opposite that would make slam.

I play the 4 level rebids as showing a good 5 card suit and 4M as showing a good 6 card suit, but both required to be minimums. (Well, I play 1S-2N and 1H-2S as including limit raises, so they are minimums that nevertheless want to be in game opposite a limit raise because of extra distribution.)

Jillybean - I suggest you call it Seattle Swedish Jacoby (since as I understand it this type of Jacoby variant comes originally from some Swedes). (And I do really mean this is Seattle expert standard - when the Tuesday night club ran an individual this was part of the decreed system.)

[jillybean]

Seattle Swedish it is.

jdiana, good question. I am going to send this to my partner and was going to suggest we play 4 level bids after 3C:3D as control (A,k) showing.

[jdiana]

jillybean, on 2024-October-14, 06:46, said:

Seattle Swedish it is.

jdiana, good question. I am going to send this to my partner and was going to suggest we play 4 level bids after 3C:3D as control (A,k) showing.

We might be losing something by not using 3NT to show a specific (i.e., hand-limiting) range. This was discussed recently on BW - https://bridgewinner...r-jacoby-raise/

(Your post is the thread I was referring to in my comment on the BW post. I really need to stop spending so much time on these sites.)

[jillybean]

jdiana, on 2024-October-14, 07:50, said:

We might be losing something by not using 3NT to show a specific (i.e., hand-limiting) range. This was discussed recently on BW - https://bridgewinner...r-jacoby-raise/

(Your post is the thread I was referring to in my comment on the BW post. I really need to stop spending so much time on these sites.)

And more time getting back to playing