[slamsRus]

Dwayne hoffman in the alert thread said:

FSF I refer to after a G/F is established and three different suits have been bid and unsupported. To me, makes things easier on pard - if you got the fourth suit covered and you can't support a game bid in his/her two suits, bid NT to tell the good news.

I also agree that they are many treatments that are misconstrued in overtone.  


As this seems to warrant a new topic, i've started one.  This is not at all what I think of as FSF, yet another eye opener for me.  Another nuance to discuss first.  In my circles FSF establishes the game force (some say for one round but that's wimpy).  And there are very few auctions that fit the mold, yet the occur surprisingly often.

always uncontested.  

1c-1h-1s-2d  ... 2d is fsf to game and says nothign about diamonds, partner is expected to bid 2nt with a diamond stopper.  Show 3c heart support, or rebid clubs.  This is one of the most common fsf auctions.

1c-1d-1h-1s --- the exception, we don't treat this as fsf, just a second suit.  The corrolorry is, if as responder you need to force to game, the auction should go 1c-1d-1h-2s!   2s is fsf and says nothing about spades.

I wonder what the standard treatments are of this convention, and what the pros-cons for variances are.

[inquiry]

First where we agree... 1c-1d-1h-1s is not 4th suit forcing, 2s would be 4th suit.

Now to the your implied question as to whether FSF forcing to game or a "wimpy" one round force. I think it is best played not so clear cut one way or the other. I play 4th suit as game force if:

• At the three level (1h-1s-2d-3c)
  
• If it is a reverse (1d-1h-2c-2s)

However, I play a reverse at the two level as the wimpy one round force. As responder I can pass if opener makes a minimum reply such as 2NT or 2 of my first suit. This has worked well for me.

[lexlogan]

Fourth Suit Forcing needs to be considered in light of your overall system, including the requirements for opening the bidding, what hands are suitable for an immediate jump shift response, how you treat jump rebids by responder, and whether the system is geared toward matchpoints or IMPs/Total Points. In general, forcing bids save bidding room for slam exploration, while non-forcing bids help with accurate game/part-score bidding. You can play jump rebids as invitational, and fourth suit as forcing one round; or play FSF to game; or play jump rebids forcing to game, FSF one round; or  play that all jump and fourth suit rebids are forcing to game.

(1) If you play a wide-ranging, light opening style, game invitations make more sense -- you will often be too high by the time the invitation is made, but the contract may not be completely hopeless or it may score better than what the opps would have bid had you stopped lower. Thus, Acol features light openings, non-forcing jump rebids, and heavy use of FSF for game-going hands. This is clearly a matchpoint-oriented style.

(2) I have for years played an Eastern Scientific matchpoint style with invitational jump rebids and FSF one round. A key agreement is that if responder takes another bid after FSF, it creates a game force; the only invitational strength hands that use FSF are those that would like opener to place the contract, such as
after 1D-1H-1S, responder holds Kxx AQxxx Qxx xx . He'll pass whatever opener rebids, and opener must jump to game with a Queen or so better than a minimum, or just extra shape. A jump shift rebid, such as 1D-1H-1S-3C, shows 5-5 invitational.

(3) If you play sound openings, responder can overbid when stuck for a rebid, especially with a fit, and enjoy having lots of forcing bids available to help explore for slam. For this purpose, it is more useful to play jump rebids by responder as game-forcing than having to drag all strong hands through the 4th suit. I'd recommend this style with 2/1 GF; some key experts play this way, but most 2/1 bidders use the Acol style (jump rebids invitational, FSFG) which I think is completely inconsistent with the IMP/slam orientation of 2/1 GF. You should have a lot more game-forcing than invitational hands since those should cover only a very narrow range; it does not make sense to reserve multiple bids for the less common strength, and you will often waste bidding room unless you treat the FSF bid as a sort of puppet (and it is more important to right-side notrump than to use a relay structure here, IMO.)

Playing responder's jump rebids as GF, responder can use FSF and then bid again without creating a game force. In other words, after 1D-1H-1S, if all of 2NT, 3C, 3D, 3H, and 3S are game-forcing, then responder can bid 2C with any invitational hand and follow up with a non-forcing, non-jump rebid in any denomination.

(4) Finally, playing sound openings at IMPs or total points, it is plausible to dispense with game invitations altogether and play FSFG along with jump rebids forcing to game. However, I think this creates a lot of ethical problems (what Edgar Kaplan used to call "that old black magic") and would not recommend this style for anything but possibly an experienced, expert partnership. If your partnership doesn't resemble Meckwell or Hamway, forget it. Also note that because style #3 still provides for game invitational sequences after anything but a 1S opening, it does not absolutely require totally sound openings (but 2/1 GF curiously punishes a light opening in spades, one of many reasons I detest the system.)

A final note: although creating a game force allows plenty of room to describe shape, further agreements are needed to clarify strength. This is my major objection to 2/1 GF: there is no universally accepted scheme of rebids once the GF has been created, so all bids are virtually meaningless in terms of strength.

[EricK]

Quote

However, I play a reverse at the two level as the wimpy one round force. As responder I can pass if opener makes a minimum reply such as 2NT or 2 of my first suit. This has worked well for me.

I have played FSF as GF and as 1RF.  I don't think 1RF works very well if 2NT is passable.  It means that with a little extra, opener has to jump to 3NT.  But what if responder wasn't looking for NT?  What if he was looking for delayed support for his suit?  What if FSF was a prelude to showing good support for opener's minor (I am assuming that eg 1D 1H 1S 3D is invitational)?

It is hard to construct a hand where 2NT is a good contract and yet 2 of opener's or responder's suit is a poor one.

So after eg 1H 1S 2C 2D,
2H is minimum NF, nothing more to say (may have stop in D)
2S is minimum NF, support (may be only doubleton S,may have D stop)
2NT  - shows stop and is game forcing
3C  - shows 5-5 and is GF
3D - Personally I think this should be artififcal.  Strong hand with 5H 4C
3H - GF 6H, 4C
3S - Extras, 3S

Eric