BBO Discussion Forums: Should this pass be forcing? - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Should this pass be forcing? 1♣-(3♠)-4♣-(4♠)-p

#1 User is offline   mgoetze 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,942
  • Joined: 2005-January-28
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cologne, Germany
  • Interests:Sleeping, Eating

Posted 2014-December-18, 15:13

1-(3)-4-(4)

1 was clubs or balanced.
We had not specifically discussed 4, but both agreed it should show 6+ clubs.

Should pass by opener now be forcing?
"One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"
    -- Bertrand Russell
0

#2 User is offline   MrAce 

  • VIP Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,971
  • Joined: 2009-November-14
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, TX

Posted 2014-December-18, 15:17

No
"Genius has its own limitations, however stupidity has no such boundaries!"
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"

"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."





0

#3 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2014-December-18, 15:23

No.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

#4 User is offline   Fluffy 

  • World International Master without a clue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,404
  • Joined: 2003-November-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:madrid

Posted 2014-December-18, 15:32

No..
0

#5 User is offline   mikeh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,836
  • Joined: 2005-June-15
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.

Posted 2014-December-18, 15:52

No


a pass ought not to be forcing beyond the level to which our partnership is committed. Here, 4 was non-forcing so we beyond our level of force, and all passes are non-forcing.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
0

#6 User is offline   awm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,306
  • Joined: 2005-February-09
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Zurich, Switzerland

Posted 2014-December-18, 16:40

While I agree with Mikeh in principle, its not totally obvious to me that 4C should be non-forcing. Surely if 1C were unbalanced partner is bidding 5C, and all the arguments for a competitive NF 4C opposite a balanced hand would also seem to apply to 4D...
Adam W. Meyerson
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
1

#7 User is offline   mgoetze 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,942
  • Joined: 2005-January-28
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cologne, Germany
  • Interests:Sleeping, Eating

Posted 2014-December-18, 16:59

I was indeed considering a followup question whether Mike would also consider 4 to be nonforcing. :) Honestly I'm having trouble making up my mind whether they should be, but in any case 4 and 4 would be treated the same by our general agreements.
"One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"
    -- Bertrand Russell
0

#8 User is offline   Cthulhu D 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,169
  • Joined: 2011-November-21
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Australia
  • Interests:Overbidding

Posted 2014-December-18, 17:12

Isn't 3C 6 clubs? Reading comprehension test FAILED
0

#9 User is offline   helene_t 

  • The Abbess
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,068
  • Joined: 2004-April-22
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:UK

Posted 2014-December-19, 06:16

View PostCthulhu D, on 2014-December-18, 17:12, said:

Isn't 3C 6 clubs?

Yes but if opps don't accept it you will have to correct to 4 anyway so it's the same thing :)
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
0

#10 User is offline   gszes 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,654
  • Joined: 2011-February-12

Posted 2014-December-19, 07:12

NO

There is nothing about 4c that even remotely approaches the concept that our side
has the balance of power. FP is based on that very concept and it is completely
absent during this auction. The 4c bid has a rather huge range and therein lies the
problem. Opener has no clue if responder is the more balanced stronger version or
the more distributional (wanting to merely compete) weaker version.

As an aside I would treat 4d as forcing since I would much rather make slam exploration
possible than worry about getting too high opposite a quicktrickless? opener. the 4d
bid should provide a long strong suit while a 4c bid need not have one since p has generally
already promised 3 so Kxxxxx can make a great 4c bid (with other stuff) while it would be
a horrific 4d bid.
0

#11 User is offline   PhilKing 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,240
  • Joined: 2012-June-25

Posted 2014-December-19, 07:27

I don't think it's right to play 4 as showing clubs at all when playing a 2+ club . Playing it as NF is trying to land in a pinhead and if you have a raise to game, there are other options available. My strong preference is to play 4 as showing hearts (good 13+ with 6+ hearts), and 4 directly as weaker.

Amongst the hands that are prepared to bypass 3NT, one-suited wth hearts is the most important, and the one on which you are most likely to stretch.

To summarise, my structure is:

4 = hearts, 13+
4 = nat GF
4 = nat, limited
4 = clubs plus spade control
4NT = slam try clubs, no spade control
5 = punt

The 4NT and should be reversed, since you might want to reach 6NT at pairs, but some agreements are just a step too far even for me.

A good alternative is to play the direct 4 as 5H4C choice of contracts and 4 as 6+ hearts - we are still ahead of the game with the one suiters and get to resolve the choice of games dilemma that can befuddle prepared club partnerships.
1

#12 User is offline   cherdano 

  • 5555
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,516
  • Joined: 2003-September-04
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2014-December-19, 18:16

If natural, 4C should be forcing in my view.
The easiest way to count losers is to line up the people who talk about loser count, and count them. -Kieran Dyke
0

#13 User is offline   Phil 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,092
  • Joined: 2008-December-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Texas, USA
  • Interests:Mountain Biking

Posted 2014-December-19, 19:42

It would suck if 4 was the only slam try. Much prefer an artificial structure like philkings.
Hi y'all!

Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

2 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users