[mikl_plkcc]

2NT as game forcing is a very old idea. In the original natural system about 70 years ago, 2NT showed 13-15 and 3NT showed 16-18. However, I would like to use 2NT as 10-12 now.

[32519]

 32519, on 2012-May-29, 15:03, said:

I am currently playing in a new F2F partnership where we are still sorting out all our bidding agreements. My partner made a bid tonight which I had never seen before. I am posting it here to find out what others think of the bid and its possible wider application.

The system we are playing is the Short Club (1♠, 1♥, 1♦ all promise a 5-card suit). I opened 1♠ and partner responded with 2NT. Now I know very well that she doesn’t know the Jacoby 2NT convention. I also knew that she was showing real values. I bid out my shape, 3♦ was my second bid which partner lifted to 5♦. Dummy comes down and partner held 1444 (singleton ♠) and an opening hand as well. We were the only table that made the contract when everyone else was playing in 3NT which goes down 1. The ♠ suit was crummy; KQ and 3 babies. Partner’s singleton was also a baby. You get only 1 ♠ trick in 3NT.

See post 7 below.
In a Short Club system where 1♠, 1♥ and 1♦ all promise a 5-card suit, this bid actually fits in quite well. The 2NT bid over the suit opened promises a 4441 hand, a singleton in the suit opened and an opening hand as well. The probability of being dealt a 4441 hand and 12+ HCP is low at only 1.04%.

 32519, on 2012-May-29, 23:38, said:

After mulling over the bid I am starting to think it fits in quite well playing Short Club, where 1♠, 1♥ and 1♦ all promise a 5-card suit. Open one of those, the 2NT bid from partner showing a 4441 hand and a singleton in the suit opened works well. Opener is in a good position now to judge where the auction is heading. With a 5332 holding and good (better) values in the suit opened that can stand a singleton from partner, 3NT is the place to be. The 5♦ contract worked well because I had a 5431 holding.

Since posting this topic originally, the 4441 hand with responder over partner’s opening bid has come up a few more times. After mulling over the bid initially, I agreed to partner’s wish to at least “experiment with it before giving up on it completely.”

We play “Short Club” but have agreed to “experiment” with the bid over all 1-level suit openings. So 1♣/♦/♥/♠ followed by 2NT promises the 4441 hand pattern, singleton in the suit opened. Placing the final contract (or allowing room for a slam try) becomes simple.
1. 1 (any)-2NT-3NT = 5332 hand pattern
2. 1 (any)-2NT-3M = extras, slam interest
..a. Cue bid = cooperating with the slam try. As the singleton suit is already known, cue-bidding it now promises the Ace or King
..b. 4M = discouraging slam try, minimum
3. 1 (any)-2NT-4M = no extras. Responder with extras now takes control of the bidding.
4. 1 (any)-2NT-4m = extras, slam interest, Minorwood for the suit bid (usually 5431 hand pattern)
5. 1 (any)-2NT-5m = no extras, signoff, 5431 hand pattern

Over 1M, Jacoby responses can still be included using Fred Gitelman’s suggestion here.

Thus far we have had no misfortunes with the bid. Until we do it will probably remain as part of our system agreements.

[broze]

 Zelandakh, on 2012-May-30, 06:13, said:

I use 1♠ - 3♣ as my GF raise because I have what I think is a more useful purpose for the 2NT response. There is not enough space for that over 3♣ but there is enough space for my "alternative to Jacoby" response structure.

Interesting. I also use 3♣ as the GF raise in ♠, so that it's basically the same as my 1♥-2NT GF raise sequence but shifted up a bid with various shortness relays etc. thrown in. It makes everything very neat.

[ColdCrayon]

 aguahombre, on 2012-May-29, 18:01, said:

Your choice not to use J2N is gaining in popularity. Top pairs who want both a natural forcing 2NT response and a Jacoby fit bid are using 2S/1H and 3C/1S for the Jacoby call.

That's interesting, because in my bidding system 2S has no meaning over 1H, and 3D over 1S doesn't either. I could push the 3C bid over one and use 2NT for....

what? I think it's already reasonably easy to show a balanced gf hand without the jump to 2NT; mostly what I hear is people finding Jacoby inadequate, and using the 1M 2NT as invitational instead. Can anyone explain to me why you want to do this?

[Zelandakh]

 ColdCrayon, on 2012-July-20, 11:08, said:

That's interesting, because in my bidding system 2S has no meaning over 1H, and 3D over 1S doesn't either. I could push the 3C bid over one and use 2NT for....

what? I think it's already reasonably easy to show a balanced gf hand without the jump to 2NT; mostly what I hear is people finding Jacoby inadequate, and using the 1M 2NT as invitational instead. Can anyone explain to me why you want to do this?

The reason for doing this is that it makes 2/1 responses show a real suit, which in turn makes it much easier to make good slam decisions. Fred is one of the leading proponents of this theory. It fits well within a 2/1 GF structure, not so well within an SAYC/SEF/Forum D/Acol base.

If you currently have the sequence 1♥ - 2♠ undefined then try this:-

1♥ - 2♠ = mini-splinter (limit raise with side shortage) or maxi-splinter (~16-19 support points with side shortage)
then 2NT from Opener is a relay and
3♣ = mini-splinter with club shortage
3♦ = mini-splinter with diamond shortage
3♥ = mini-splinter with heart shortage
3♠ = maxi-splinter with side void (3NT asks where)
3NT = maxi-splinter with spade singleton
4♣ = maxi-splinter with club singleton
4♦ = maxi-splinter with diamond singleton

It is a useful addition to almost any system that does not need this call for another purpose. FWiiW, this is also what I use a 2NT response for after a 1♠ opening.

[Mbodell]

 Zelandakh, on 2012-July-23, 01:09, said:

The reason for doing this is that it makes 2/1 responses show a real suit, which in turn makes it much easier to make good slam decisions. Fred is one of the leading proponents of this theory. It fits well within a 2/1 GF structure, not so well within an SAYC/SEF/Forum D/Acol base.

If you currently have the sequence 1♥ - 2♠ undefined then try this:-

1♥ - 2♠ = mini-splinter (limit raise with side shortage) or maxi-splinter (~16-19 support points with side shortage)
then 2NT from Opener is a relay and
3♣ = mini-splinter with club shortage
4♣ = maxi-splinter with club singleton

Why use both levels? Can't you just use the 3♣ bid for both and have responder bid on with the maxi. As long as the ranges are truly spit (so like 8-11 and 15-19) you will not have hesitation problems and you can leave more room for exploration.

[Zelandakh]

 Mbodell, on 2012-July-23, 20:39, said:

Why use both levels? Can't you just use the 3♣ bid for both and have responder bid on with the maxi. As long as the ranges are truly spit (so like 8-11 and 15-19) you will not have hesitation problems and you can leave more room for exploration.

The extra room is somewhat illusory because it is necessary for game exploration. After 1♥ - 2♠; 2NT - 3♣, let's say that Opener has a hand that wants to go to game. Playing the system as written they simply bid 4♥. If 3♣ were a 2-way bid then they would have to make allowance for this, presumably by bidding a non-serious 3♠ or some-such. But then non-serious covers any hand from a game accept up to a slam try. It just gets harder to sort everything out and these are otherwise idle bids, so I think the overall effect is better showing the range immediately. Others are more than welcome to take the idea and try it out in different forms...