BBO Discussion Forums: Semi-forcing NT vs Forcing NT - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Semi-forcing NT vs Forcing NT

Poll: Semi-forcing NT vs Forcing NT (44 member(s) have cast votes)

What 1NT response to 1M do you prefer?

  1. Forcing (10 votes [22.73%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 22.73%

  2. Semi-Forcing (34 votes [77.27%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 77.27%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#41 User is offline   rhm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,937
  • Joined: 2005-June-27

Posted 2017-August-18, 15:19

View Postmike777, on 2017-August-12, 16:30, said:

If you open lite I would strongly recommend you play semiforcing nt...You are more likely to want to pass 1nt to show your junky bal or semi bal hand.
Keep in mind you will still rebid with 2 decent suits or more than a dead minimum. In any event you will be surprised how seldom passing 1nt comes up in practice. Please keep in mind playing this style you are pushing many hand types through 1nt.

OTOH if you open pretty sound you will never want to pass so forcing 1nt makes more sense.

I do not see your point.
Whether you open light or sound has an impact on the minimum requirements partner needs for a 2/1 response.
Either way opener can have a minimum for opening, whatever that is according to your agreements and style.
And if opener has a balanced minimum opening in your style you will want to pass 1NT. Such hands are frequent.

My feeling is that 1NT forcing is in theory unsound.
If responder has not enough to go to the two level you want to be able to stop as early as possible if the requirements for game are not present.
Of course playing a bid forcing increases the number of possible sequences. But this is true for any forcing bid.
But forcing bids also forces opener to find a new bid when he has none. Accordingly a rebid of 2 or 2 are much more likely to be 3 card suits than when the bid is made over a 1NT response which could have been passed.

The concept that a limit raise shows 4 trumps is a consequence of playing 1NT forcing.
I see little benefit of doing so.
Bid 1NT with a balanced limit raise with 3 trumps.
If opener passes 1NT, he should be (semi)balanced and you are most likely in a good contract.
In fact opener can use as a criteria, whether he would have rejected a balanced three card limit raise. If yes and if he is (semi)balanced he should pass 1NT.
Just agree to limit raise directly if you have an unbalanced invitation with 3 card support.
Of course there must be some compensating high card values values for an unbalanced 3 card limit raise compared to an unbalanced 4 card limit raise.

I never had problems with this.

Rainer Herrmann

#42 User is offline   mike777 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 16,739
  • Joined: 2003-October-07
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-August-18, 17:20

It is fine if you want to call it semiforcing nt or nonforcing nt but we rarely comes out the same. the most important point would be you rarely pass....the issue is not does opener have a minimum hand....the issue is does opener have a dead minimum hand there is a huge difference in standards of measurement....this is where the confusion in the discussion arises.

Also pls keep in mind we are talking about hands where the opp are have a dead minimum hand...pard responds 1nt and the opp are silent.

Share this topic:

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users