[adhoc3]

Quote

no 1N is not forcing. I don't see how a passed hand could make a forcing 1N bid...even if by agreement it is it would always be free for opening bidder to pass knowing his pard is limited.

In Mike Lawrence's book, Bidding Guidance After 2 Passes (I am not sure if it is the exact name in English), he pointed out that 1NT forcing off for a passed hand was wrong --- when 2/1 by a passed hand would not be GF. Given with Drury, forcing NT still work fine for a passed hand. A few expamples were given in this book:

1) 865 J4 Q1086 KJ97

Pass 1H
1NT 2C
2H

2) Q7 542 A10875 Q43 (this hand maybe wrong printed)

Pass 1S
1NT 2D
2S(!)

3) Q7 542 AQ1097 Q43

Pass 1S
1NT 2D
3D* encouraging

4) J7 J42 J8642 QJ3

Pass 1S
1NT 2D
Pass

5)AKJ 43 QJ96 9752

Pass 1H
1NT 2C
2NT

However, he noted, the opener should pass the forcing NT with balanced hand and less 14 hcps.

The posted hand is quite similar with 1). So back to S is Lawrence style.

[P_Marlowe]

2S

I believe in rules, and one rule is,
that I always bid partner 5 card suit.

On the ground, that 5-2 tends to play
better than 4-3.

Marlowe

[adhoc3]

Jlall, on Dec 8 2005, 02:55 AM, said:

adhoc3, on Dec 8 2005, 02:11 AM, said:

However, he noted, the opener should pass the forcing NT with balanced hand and less 14 hcps.

Thus 1N is not forcing. Partner bids with an unbalanced hand, and passes with a weak NT, this is how people bid in SAYC. The idea of calling it "semi-forcing" because with 14 and 5332 opener will bid whereas in SAYC opener would pass seems silly, thats the only difference. I think that bidding doesn't work if we make "fourteen" it's own special category. A weak NT is a weak NT. If I have a 14 I will just pass 1N or upgrade the hand to a 1N opener initially. Bidding with a 5332 14 just in case partner happens to have a balanced 11 so that we can get to a slim game that may or may not make does not make sense to me, sometimes sh!t happens. I prefer to keep the integrity of the 2m bids. Even if I concede that it's "standard" to bid with a 5332 14 count that could not upgrade to a 1N opener, it is such an infrequent occurence when the bid is 2D that I'm willing to ignore it.

Yes, a passed hand can't make 100% 'forcing NT bid', as part of his right of making judgement has been deprived by his initial pass. All the rebid form the opener is game oriental, in case PD could have 11 hcps (for which 14 hcp make sense as a threshold).

What Lawrence suggested are:
1) opener is to pass with 5332, 4333, 4432 and 14- hcp ('forced' to pass by agreement);
2) opener is forced to bid with unbalance hand (any hcps) or 15+ hcp (any shape);
3) responder shall bid his forcing NT just like he never passed;
4) responder pass/raise opener's rebid, if it happen to be his 5 cards minor when weak/strong.

So for the case posted, using Lawrence's style, 2D could be 3 cards suit in a 14+ hand, back to S might be a must.

If the purpose of the post is to test the common style of responce to specific hand, 2S/2D seems to be equal. There're some other considerations out of discussion: what's the range of 4th seat 1NT? is there 4th seat intermmediate 2x opening? is it too cheap to buy the contract? ...etc.

I'll bid 2S anyway.

Regards,

Jack

[FrancesHinden]

2S is just the normal call.
It seems far too deep to me to pass 2D.
I'm not ashamed of my hand, not so much so that I want to pass as fast as possible.

[joker_gib]

2♠ automatic

Alain

[Fluffy]

2♠ easy as well. Would only pass with 2-3 if I was really afraid of parnter bidding again.

[inquiry]

I am in DEEP. I pass...

The reason for this pass are several fold.

1) Partner is more likely on this auction to have five diamonds than 4. After all, with 5242 and 5341 he might pass. With 5440 and 5044 he would have bid a suit other than diamonds. And with 5332 or any hand with 4 spades, he would pass 1NT. With a good hand with six spades (and 4D) he would have opened 2♠ and with a modest hand like he would have rebid 2♠ (some players reverse these two holdings so 2♠ shows the modest hand with 6 spades, and 1S-bid-2S shows the better hand, but anyway, he also will not be 6-4.

2) If I bid 2♠, partner might not pass. That is, when both 2♠ and 2♦ are making, his supposed (hoped for) distribution, might encourage him to make one more call getting us too high.

3) If I pass 2♦ there is more pressure on the opponents to balance, which wouldn't necessarily be bad for us. If I bid 2♠, they might worry that I was doing exactly what I would be doing, taking false preference and we might very well be in a misfit. IF I pass, they might assume our "fit" is better than it is, and be enticed to enter the bidding.

If I was not a passed hand, I would clearly, and unashamedly, rebid 2♠.

[Kalvan14]

2♦ might still come from a good 6-4, and 4♠ are not completely out of the picture. Just most of the time

Passing 1N with 14 balanced is a no-brainer. I admit unashamedly opening 1N on a good 14 HCP.

You did not tell us what would have happened in 2♠, btw. And if the 3♣ in the other room was justified or not.

I would not consider passing 2♦ a cardinal sin, but some partners might

[pclayton]

By the way, we've made a nice little adjustment in our response structure to a passed hand 1N.

2N (over 1N) shows the 15-17 (although we play a 12-14 NT) and 3N shows the 18-19. I should also note we have a limited 2♣ opener so we don't automatically bid with a trashy 5 count, since Opener is somewhat limited.

Even if you play a 15-17 NT, for most players (not all; lets not go there) there are some hands that you'd rather not open 1N with a 5 card major holding a 5332. So you still have the rebid challenges after 1 major - 1N - ?

This takes away the issues with worrying about making a call with a 9 count holding 4 card support for opener's 2nd suit.

[adhoc3]

Jlall, on Dec 8 2005, 11:09 PM, said:

AKQxx x Kxxx KQT

pass-1S
1NT--2D
2S---3C? Is this an auto bid?

[P_Marlowe]

Jlall, on Dec 8 2005, 11:09 PM, said:

Kalvan14, on Dec 8 2005, 08:40 PM, said:

You did not tell us what would have happened in 2♠, btw. And if the 3♣ in the other room was justified or not.

Partner had an auto 3C bid. He had something like

AKQxx x Kxxx KQT

Hi,

with this hand, it would have paid to play 1NT 100% forcing,
because 2S would have shown either not fit with 6-9, or 4-7HCP,
which makes 3C a lot less attractive.

Marlowe

[mike777]

P_Marlowe, on Dec 9 2005, 02:37 AM, said:

Jlall, on Dec 8 2005, 11:09 PM, said:

Kalvan14, on Dec 8 2005, 08:40 PM, said:

You did not tell us what would have happened in 2♠, btw. And if the 3♣ in the other room was justified or not.

Partner had an auto 3C bid. He had something like

AKQxx x Kxxx KQT

Hi,

with this hand, it would have paid to play 1NT 100% forcing,
because 2S would have shown either not fit with 6-9, or 4-7HCP,
which makes 3C a lot less attractive.

Marlowe

One can still play constructive raises by a passed hand and NOT play forcing nt by a passed hand!

Given that partner has denied 7-10 hcp and 3 spades. I still think opener has a problem rebid.....good luck!

'
give partner:
Jx=AKxx=Jx=JXXXX

[Kalvan14]

I've to agree. 3♣ is the right bid with pard's hand.
I'm still bidding 2♠ on the other side. Pard can have a 6-4, even a good one (actually, if he has a 6-4, it will be a good one)

[beatrix45]

2♠

Partner must have either a stiff club or heart. Unless she is 5-5, then passing 2♦ puts us in a 4-3 fit with the tap in the long hand - not usually good unless it turns out to be a pure scramble hand.

In 2♠ pard may be able to score her trumps separately by ruffing along with the club ace and whatever other top tricks we have - result figures to be down one or making. Lastly, if pard is on top with 5-5, she might try 3♦ over 2♠, and I can pass.

All in all, I cannot see bidding 2♠ leading to a disaster, while passing 2♦ might. Can anyone construct a hand for partner with 5 spades and 4 diamonds and a stiff that makes exactly eight tricks in diamonds but only seven tricks in spades? How likely is it that pard holds such a hand?

[bearmum]

2♠ as I HOPE P would not bid 2♦ IF he only had 4♠ and 3♦ (or am I missing the blooming obvious?)