[jillybean]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 Pass  1♦    Pass  1♥
 Pass  1♠    Pass  3♥
 Pass  4♥    Pass  4NT
 Pass  5♥    Pass  5NT
 Pass  6♦    Pass  6♥
 Pass  Pass  Pass  

Lucky to get to 6♥ here, both 1♠ and 3♥ I believe are not forcing.
I think opener should have rebid 2♠ and over 1♠ South has no option
other than 2♣ 4sf?

tyia
jb

[HeartA]

North's bidding is fine. I don't think North should bid 2S over 1H. 1), North's overal strength (16 HCP) is not good for 2S; 2) North's structure of 5-4-2-2 is not very good, with the unsupported CQ; 3) North's S is not good.

3H over 1S is not forcing. As you said, 2C would be forcing to game. I would bid 2C over 1S and then bid 3H after that (if possible). The final contract is good, after all.

[Walddk]

North's hand is far from good enough for a jump shift. 1♠ is fine. 3♥ is not since it's non-forcing. She must go through 4th suit first, unless your agreement is to play weak jump shifts; then 3♥ becomes forcing.

I don't know what kind of Blackwood you play, but assuming RKCB, 5NT is also wrong when South knows you are off 1 key card. Then 5NT (specific king asking) guarantees all 5 key cards.

You will get to the 6-level no matter what, so there is no point in bidding 5NT unless you are interested in grand slam. Therefore, bid 6♥ over the 5♥ response.

As an aside, the play is interesting on a club lead with the king offside. You try the queen, but as expected RHO has the king. Now the best line is to cash ♥A (it is usually not when missing Kxx, then finessing is with the odds). However, even if no king appears when you cash the ace, you will be very unlucky if you go down in the slam.

On a very bad day you go down when one opponent has all three hearts and a singleton or doubleton diamond.

Roland

[P_Marlowe]

Hi.

the 1S bid by opener is fine, a 2S bid forcing
to game, is that really your intention opposite
a partner who just bid 1H?

There are two styles out there, one plays 1S as
nonforcing (the majority on this forum) and the
other plays 1S as forcing (my preference).

The hand is worth a strong jump shift to 2H,
in case you play constructive weak jump shifts,
3H is forcing (South probably thinks that).
If you play 3H as non forcing, reponder has to
bid 4H (reasonable) or has to go through 4th suit.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[jillybean]

Thanks, I keep on thinking 2♠ is a reverse in these auctions...its a strong jump of course. Always in doubt with a pickup partner that 1♠ will be forcing.

[hrothgar]

Hi JB

Few comments here:

1. Some people would consider a 1NT opening with the North hand. (You're actually well positioned after a 1♥ response but you might have rebid problems after 1♠ or 2♣).

2. The South hand is a freak. Most people don't spend to much time worry about 8 card suits. I'd make a strong jump shift if I had one available (This hand contributed 8 tricks in a heart contract) Otherwise, I'll bid a pedestrian 1♥. For what its worth, I have no idea what a constructive weak jump shift is, but I'd never consider making a "weak" bid with this hand.

3. Playing weak jump shifts (and a forcing 1♠ rebid) the auction should start

1♦ - 1♥
1♠ - 2♣
2♦ - 2♥
2N - 3♥
3♠

The 2♦ rebid denies a full club stop
The 2N rebid after 2♥ shows a half stop

After the 3♥ bid, you can start cue bidding

[P_Marlowe]

hrothgar, on Nov 5 2006, 08:21 AM, said:

<snip>
For what its worth, I have no idea what a constructive weak jumpt shoft is, but I'd never consider making a "weak" bid with this hand.
<snip>

Playing weak jump shifts, you can play
that a weak jump shift is really garbage,
say 4-7HCP and a 6 carder (or even less),
or that the weak jump shift promise a certain
playing strength, say 5-8/9.

In the first case 3H in the sequence

Pass 1♦ Pass 1♥
Pass 1♠ Pass 3♥

is still only inv., while in the later case,
the 3H is forcing.

And I would assume, that South thought, that 3H
is forcing, since no one, would really like to stop
below game with the South hand.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mikeh]

I agree 100% with Roland, and, jb, do NOT start playing that 1♠ is forcing. That is distinctly non-standard and completely unnecessary. Just remember that it will be an extremely rare hand on which one would pass.

If I held Qxx Qxxxx x Jxxx and partner opened 1♦, I would bid 1♥ and pass 1♠. Make it xxxx AJxx x xxxx and again I pass 1♠. Make it J10xx AJxx x xxxx and I'd raise 1♠ to 2♠.

[Winstonm]

jillybean2, on Nov 5 2006, 08:11 AM, said:

Thanks, I keep on thinking 2♠ is a reverse in these auctions...its a strong jump of course.  Always in doubt with a pickup partner that 1♠ will be forcing.

1S is not forcing - but then the opening hand isn't strong enough to force to game so that is fine. If responder has a suitable hand that might produce game versese a 16-17 count, he would not pass 1S - but then he might be weak.

Suppose responder held: xxx, KQxxx, x, xxxx

Playing the hand in 1S is certainly OK.

[Walddk]

mikeh, on Nov 5 2006, 05:20 PM, said:

If I held Qxx Qxxxx x Jxxx and partner opened 1♦, I would bid 1♥ and pass 1♠. Make it xxxx AJxx x xxxx and again I pass 1♠. Make it J10xx AJxx x xxxx and I'd raise 1♠ to 2♠.

I agree with you in examples 1 and 3, but not with 2. This is a 2♠ raise. Passing 1♠ shows exactly three spades in my book, and a weak hand of course.

I do not pass with 4-card support for opener's major (game may still be on), but sometimes I do with support for his minor. Example:

Qxxx
x
Kxxx
xxxx

1♥ - 1♠
2♣ - Pass

After a non jump shift, game is remote.


Roland

[Winstonm]

mikeh, on Nov 5 2006, 10:20 AM, said:

I agree 100% with Roland, and, jb, do NOT start playing that 1♠ is forcing. That is distinctly non-standard and completely unnecessary. Just remember that it will be an extremely rare hand on which one would pass.

If I held Qxx Qxxxx x Jxxx and partner opened 1♦, I would  bid 1♥ and pass 1♠. Make it xxxx AJxx x xxxx and again I pass 1♠. Make it J10xx AJxx x xxxx and I'd raise 1♠ to 2♠.

I agree with Mike's analysis - however, just to show both sides 1S can, by partnership agreement, be played as forcing. The problem comes with what I call the "ripple" effects" of bidding alterations.

What is the benefit of playing 1S as forcing? The main one is to separate 2 types hands, the 1S rebid folled by a game bid to show a semi-balanced 19+ count and the 2S rebid to show a playing type hand with lots of tricks and shape - also, if 1S is played as forcing there is no need for a Stamyman-like checkback over a 2N rebid as that bid would deny a 4-card major that could be bid at the 1-level.

The big disadvantage comes from a more mundane area - 1C-1H-1S-2S. As responder is forced to bid, the range of responses is wide, so now how much hand does it require to make a game try? You may have to make only a game try with 17-18 - or is it a good 14-16? - and then how does responder know how to act over this game try with a 6-7 count if the range is 14-18?

That's the ripple effect at work - One seemingly simple change cascades through other auctions and causes an alteration in those sequences. That's why it's so hard to develope a truly good convention/system - all the repercussions of the changes must been identified and taken into account.

[sfbp]

There is a widely held opinion that 1x-1y-1♠ is forcing.

I ran into this a couple of months ago when my normally sane precision partner and my partner's partner (we were playing 5 man swiss so everyone changed and changed about) perpetrated a nice sequence ending in slam that started this way. And I said "how can you bid 1♠ here?" And he said "of course, playing with you, I wouldn't".

Nevertheless both he and P's p agreed 100% that the 1S was forcing. They even agreed to play XYZ, and the next bid was 2♦ by responder.

Once again, we run into the fact that 2S shows such a monster that we overload the 1S bid.

This is another example of "standard" bidding that makes it soooo hard for beginners.

Yes, mikeh, a difficult journey when we are handicapped by such illogical logic.

[Robert]

Hi everyone

Playing 1S as forcing is a style that I like, however, without discussion I would assume that many players might pass. With the current example hand, I would likely be delighted 'if' partner felt that he had responded on a minimum(sub minimum hand and he passed. This exception to my viewpoint still does not cause me to shift away from my chosen style of 1D-1H-1S forcing bidding style. I feel that the gains from my bidding style gain more in the long run.

What pray tell does opener bid holding extra values and 4=3=5=1 'if' 1S is not forcing? You miss game opposite the xxx KQxxx xxx xx hand types. Or do you jump shift and find Jxx Qxxx xx QJx that you have forced to game 'without' an eight card fit or anywhere near game values.

I do not see the problem with partner bidding 2Ss holding four card support and
6-9 dummy points. Why would opener continue to bid without values for game opposite the 8-9 range? Even 'if' responder promised 8-9 dummy points to raise to 2S, what reason does opener have to bid on with some random 14 count?

Jump shifts 1D-1H-2S* should promise game values(19+) A reverse bid may be made on 17 HCP and some 'pure' 16 counts xxx AKxx AKQxx x after 1D-1S-2H
Reverse bids are not game forcing, however, I do play them as a one round force.

In some bridge games, that 3H bid is forcing. The modern style shows an invitation type hand.

Regards,
Robert

[pclayton]

1. Strong JS is a fine call with South. These aren't as out of favor as many see to suggest (side note: I'm starting to play them more again and I hope we have some discussions here about SJS).

2. Agree with Mike, Roland, Winston, etc.. that 1♠ is fine. The Q♣ needs to be the Ace for me to JS.

3. Unless 3♥ is forcing, South has to temporize with 2♣. Fortunately, North has a cheap 2♦ call and South can convey the texture of this hand with a 3♥ call.

4. Over 3♥, North has a very interesting call. The hand is way too good for 4♥, and I can understand 3♠ (if its read as a cue for ♥'s) or 5♥ (if its asking for a club control).