Gazzilli simplifies awkward jump shift decisions
Those awkward decisions
Bridge is full of awkward decisions. Hand evaluation often ends up exactly in between two (or more) possible actions. With the Modern American system, we try to predetermine or eliminate those border cases as much as possible.
One frequent problem is that after you open 1 of a major and your partner makes a 1-level response (e.g., 1♥-1NT, 1♠-1NT, and 1♥-1♠), you have more than a minimal (12-15 HCP) opening hand.
One thing that eases our pain versus the 2/1 system bidders is that we have adopted the response 1NT as nonforcing, 6-9 HCP and no support for the major. When the opening was 1♥, the 1NT also denies 4 spades, saving us from having to show a 5-4 shape hand with a 2♠ pseudo reverse.
The next convention we adopted to help us is the Gazzilli 2♣ rebid. This lets the opener make a forcing bid, and the responder further describe their hand. The full Gazzilli convention and articles about it are described on the convention page. In short, after the opener rebids 2♣, the responder makes the artificial response 2♦ to indicate they have more than a minimal 5-7 HCP. Any other bid shows 8 or more.
Consider if you pick up this hand:
And, after you open 1♠, your partner bids 1NT (remember 6-9 non-forcing)
Do you bid 2♥ or 3♥? If you only bid 2♥, it might die there when you had a makeable game contract opposite even 8 HCP from responder. On the other hand, if you jump to 3♥ and your partner was obligated to bid with a minimal 6 (or even 5) HCP, the 3-level may be your doom in the field. Until the ACBL allows the option to bid 2 ½ hearts, you are on the horns of a dilemma.
Not so much if you play Gazilli. It allows you to ask your partner which part of the 1NT range they responded with. If you hear 2♦, you can bid 2♥ to show your shape (and the initial Gazilli shows your points). Your partner now has choices: support the hearts, show a very good 2-card spade suit, or bid No-Trump. If they show points and hearts, you can drive to the game. If they claim points and spades (2 of them), they have denied 4 hearts so that you can turn your gaze toward a 3NT contract.
Let's take a look at the full deal:
And the auction has been 1♠-1NT; 2♣-2♥-;
The responder shows <8 HCP and a 4+ card heart suit they couldn't show with their first bid. You know that the responder has 2 or fewer spades, 4 or more hearts, and <8 HCP. You can choose which part-score contract you'd like to bail out with. Given the singleton club, perhaps 2♥ is best. Generally, consider how the field (who don't play the Modern American treatment) will bid this hand. You might have to raise the 1NT to 2NT to invite. Will 2NT work out?
You might have been successful in playing 3♥s. You have two definite losers in trumps. You have a diamond loser to play around, plus the K
has to be on the correct side — which it isn't. Many pairs will be in 4♥ when the South jumps to 3♥ to try to show a 17+ point hand.
Another advantage of the Gazzilli is that, when you make a jump shift in hearts in this auction, you tightly limit your hand to 15-16 HCP. The inference is that you decided not to use Gazzilli. That implies you don't have enough HCP; it can also hint at a 5-5 shape (distribution values), and your partner can be more scientific about passing or raising. They also won't be tempted to bid 3NT over your jump shift.
Pairs using natural systems face an uncomfortably wide range of hands when making a non-jump shift. It could be a very shapely 11 HCP hand up to 17 HCP with a flatish 5-4 shape hand. How can your partner decide whether to pass or raise with 8 or even 9 HCP?
And if you jump-shift with a slightly shaded valuation, you may force your partner to game with a weak hand; they are only human and like to accept invitations when tempted. Worse, in 2/1 with forcing NT. You have to be savvy that your partner may actually hold a limit raise in your opening suit, bidding their time to jump respond. This wide range might tempt them to pursue slam when you didn't intend to be there (or safely be there).
When you guess wrong, you blame the system, but you don't have to. Pick a better system.