[whereagles]

IJS suck anyway

SJS (splinter jump shifts), starting with invitational strength and up to infinity, are preferable and strategically correct because they folow the "shape first, hcp later" principle of bidding priorities.

[jdonn]

whereagles, on Apr 28 2007, 03:04 AM, said:

IJS suck anyway

SJS (splinter jump shifts), starting with invitational strength and up to infinity, are preferable and strategically correct because they folow the "shape first, hcp later" principle of bidding priorities.

Lol

unlike IJS, which show shape AND hcp at once?

[whereagles]

Yes, unlike IJS because an IJS hand still has a lot to say, like extra length, degree of fit for opener's major, side singletons, location of high cards, etc. All this remains to be said while squandering bidding space.

An SpJS sets fit for good and shows shape. All that remains to be said is hcp strength, which is like a step or two more. A much more precise bid.

[jdonn]

Yes, clearly a bid that is like 10-20 and shows partner 5 cards in your hand (4 card support and a singleton) is more precise than a bid that is like 10-11 and shows partner 6 cards in your hand.

It sounds from your comments about it like you have no idea how to play an invitational jump shift response.

[whereagles]

And it sounds from your comments that you don't know that jumping around without fit is a rather risky business, but ok. There's a world of a difference between jumping with a good fit and squandering bidding space on potential misfits.

[jdonn]

So weak, invitational, and strong jump shifts are all bad because they all don't show a fit? It's dumb to play any jump as natural, they all have to promise a fit, got it.

Anyway I thought the objection was they aren't precise enough, now it's that they are too risky? Why the change? Or is it just that you are making assumptions and generalizations about a convention you have never played. But maybe I'm wrong and you have played it, in which case I'm sure you'll tell us about a few of those times it came up and worked disasterously.

[whereagles]

I played IJS for like 3 years and hated it. It annoyed me because I seemed to always have another way to bid the hand that was preferrable. Pure IJS hands, where making the bid was both correct and safe, were very rare. Somehow there was always a flaw. Either the suit was broken or that void in opener's suit didn't look good or there was a 4-card side suit or the IJS didn't honor the hand's extra shape or what not.

In a nutshell, either the hand is very pure, say,

x
KQJxxx
Axx
xxx

or it's preferable to bid the hand in some other way.

As for jump shifts that don't show a fit being bad bids, yeah that's a bit how I feel. If you want to bid a hand that's a possible misfit by jumping around, you gotta be pretty sure that's the right way to bid it. I.e. the bid must be very pure, very precise and relatively safe. Kinda like the hand above (for IJS purpose, that is).

On the other hand, jump shifts with fitted hands are quite ok. They show a good fit, so they're safe. The hand type is also usually well-defined, so that leaves opener in charge (which I think it's correct when he's unlimited). I seem to see everything right with them and little wrong...

[jdonn]

whereagles, on Apr 28 2007, 04:01 PM, said:

I played IJS for like 3 years and hated it. It annoyed me because I seemed to always have another way to bid the hand that was preferrable. Pure IJS hands, where making the bid was both correct and safe, were very rare. Somehow there was always a flaw. Either the suit was broken or that void in opener's suit didn't look good or there was a 4-card side suit or the IJS didn't honor the hand's extra shape or what not.

In a nutshell, either the hand is very pure, say,

x
KQJxxx
Axx
xxx

or it's preferable to bid the hand in some other way.

As for jump shifts that don't show a fit being bad bids, yeah that's a bit how I feel. If you want to bid a hand that's a possible misfit by jumping around, you gotta be pretty sure that's the right way to bid it. I.e. the bid must be very pure, very precise and relatively safe. Kinda like the hand above (for IJS purpose, that is).

On the other hand, jump shifts with fitted hands are quite ok. They show a good fit, so they're safe. The hand type is also usually well-defined, so that leaves opener in charge (which I think it's correct when he's unlimited). I seem to see everything right with them and little wrong...

I'll give you credit, that is your best post that I can remember. You are much better off when you try logic and bridge arguments than pointless incorrect generalizations Even though you did change your mind another time, from not precise enough, to too risky, to now too infrequent.

Anyway, have a nice day.

[whereagles]

doh! those generalizations are just the outcome of lengthy reasonings like the above.. lol

cheers