[Free]

The auction (2/1 GF), we're Vulnerable, opponents are NV:
1♠ - pass - 1NT! - Dbl
2♠ - pass - 2NT - Dbl
pass - 3♣ - 3♠ - 5♣
pass? - pass - ...

[inquiry]

Absolutely, totally, not... On what grounds would we ever consider this a forcing pass?

[pclayton]

Not even close.

[mikeh]

NOOOOOO!!!!!!

not even close. while different pairs wil have different rules for fp situations, one very common and useful rule is that fp does not apply beyond the level to which we have forced ourselves.

If we have forced ourselves to the 4-level, then a pass of a lower call by an opp is forcing.

Another common rule is that if we have voluntarily bid game to make, the opps can't play beyond our game undoubled: this rule does lead to -850 on occasion, but is otherwise sound.

Here, we have not forced ourselves anywhere: we didn't even force ourselves to the 3 level: our 3♠ was a competitive move, and carried no invitational connotations at all, since opener had already declined an invitational 2N.

And we certainly did not force ourselves to game. So neither of the above rules, nor any other I know, would remotely suggest that this is a fp situation. I just hope we can beat it.

[whereagles]

If you play the Robson/Segal forcing pass rules, this is forcing.

Why? Because any "invitational or better bid creates a forcing pass if opps bid to the FIVE level." In this case, the inv or better bid was 2NT.

[P_Marlowe]

I voted yes, but of course, it depends on agreement.
If you play sound openings, ... which 2/1 implies,
than I cant imagine, to let them play 5C with an penalty
double, I have opened, partner has a 10-12 bal. hand.


With kind regards
Marlowe

[hatchett]

Not forcing for me.

[mikeh]

P_Marlowe, on Dec 21 2006, 02:39 PM, said:

I voted yes, but of course, it depends on agreement.
If you play sound openings, ... which 2/1 implies,
than I cant imagine, to let them play 5C with an penalty
double, I have opened, partner has a 10-12 bal. hand.


With kind regards
Marlowe

But this does not address the issue. Under the constraints of the auction, you may well conclude that one of you should be doubling, and perhaps one of you has the hand with which to do it: but, and this is a major but, is there anything about this auction that suggests that a pass invites partner to actually bid something?

In my view, absolutely not. Opener passed 2N, so he has no interest in any other suit nor in 5♠. Responder bid an invitational 2N, so he isn't interested in bidding 5♠ nor in venturing into a new suit at the 5-level.

A forcing pass is used to 'force' partner to choose between doubling and bidding something. Here, neither partner can logically have anything to bid, so the fp doesn't exist.

I agree that it is hard to construct hands on which ew can make 5♣, but that is not the point. The fact that the sequence is NOT a forcing pass doesn't bar either N or S from doubling

[Apollo81]

Free, on Dec 21 2006, 01:37 PM, said:

The auction (2/1 GF), we're Vulnerable, opponents are NV:
1♠ - pass - 1NT! - Dbl
2♠ - pass - 2NT - Dbl
pass - 3♣ - 3♠ - 5♣
pass? - pass - ...

As Justin said, your side can't be bidding 5♠ here, so there is no need for a forcing pass.

[sathyab]

When I first read it I thought the question was really for the other side. If someone were to bid 5s, should a pass over that be forcing ? I'd say for sure

[cherdano]

whereagles, on Dec 21 2006, 09:01 PM, said:

If you play the Robson/Segal forcing pass rules, this is forcing.

Why? Because any "invitational or better bid creates a forcing pass if opps bid to the FIVE level." In this case, the inv or better bid was 2NT.

I guarantee you that Robson/Segal play this pass as non-forcing. It's even clear from the rule you quote, 2N is "invite", not "invite or better".
Btw, not only are we lacking the strength to play a forcing pass, it also seems pretty useless as both hands are pretty well-defined.

[whereagles]

cherdano, on Dec 22 2006, 11:06 AM, said:

I guarantee you that Robson/Segal play this pass as non-forcing. It's even clear from the rule you quote, 2N is "invite", not "invite or better".

That depends a bit on how you interpret the rule (for instance, you may require exactly "inv or better", or you may agree that it only applies to fit auctions, etc.).

In any case I do agree this situation isn't logically a forcing pass one, but if you take an interpretation of Robson/Segal by which this IS a forcing pass situation, then I think you should treat it as so.

[jikl]

If opener had bid anything apart from pass at their 3rd bid, 100% forcing. In this example, 100% non-forcing.

Sean

[Gerben42]

It's non-forcing since we are not invitational OR BETTER. We invited and that was it.

[Al_U_Card]

Both hands have been described and despite the vulnerability, you have not shown the values for game (invitation, yes, but a minimum opener with 6S opposite 10-11 with a stiff spade honor is not enough for game). His pass says he has nothing more than promised and likely nothing much in clubs.....

[inquiry]

Justin got it right for the right reason. Here is the major issue.

A forcing pass ask partner to choose the most profitable bid (but not pass) when the opponents compete in our auction. This is either to bid on to a higher contract for us, or to double them. That is, the last hand to bid must either DOUBLE or bid one more for the road.

On this hand, as noted by many people above, it is not logical that opener could be harboring any thoughts of responder bidding 5♠. That is simply not a logical choice ever on this auction. Since opener can not be inviting responder to bid on, PASS CAN NOT BE FORCING. Use whatever rules you want to define this situation, but there it is. And, opener knows his partner has a balanced hand, poor spade fit, and approximate hcp range, and didn't double. This means responder needs sure defensive quick tricks to double.

It is likely, but certainly not manditory, for responder to double. And for goodness sake, Responder better not take this as a forcnig pass and pull to 5♠ based upon an offensive "balanced" hand.

[neilkaz]

This really doesn't look like a forcing pass to me, but rather a pass that isn't sure whether 5♣ makes.

[dake50]

Even if 1nt F1 handles ALL balanced hands to free up 2/1 for 5-suits, partners 2NT limited his hand. You are captain --make your best guess.

[temp3600]

I disagree with several posts in this thread.

First, about the Robson & Segal rule, "any invitational or better bid creates a forcing pass if opps bid to the FIVE level", I really think it is meant as "any (invitational) OR (better)", rather than "any (invitational or better)". The latter seems way too specific, while the former makes a lot of sense : if we have an opening hand facing an (invitational) OR (better) hand, we are not letting them play at the 5 level undoubled.

Which brings me to the forcing pass. I think that the situation here is a little strange, in that it IS a forcing pass, according to the rule, but one of our choices - we bid on - has been made impossible by our previous bids. So, since we cannot let them play undoubled at the 5 level, we are left with the only choice to double them.