Help
Take the auction (no interference) 1♦ 1♥ 2♣ 2♦ 2♠. Although it was undiscussed, please accept that both partners know 2♠ was showing shape (whatever you interpret that to mean, though 3154 is typical) and not something artificial like 2254 without a spade stopper. I had a discussion on the forcing nature of this bid.
In bidding practice with a new partner who is very good I did pass on such a hand, seeing no reason to continue the auction on a very bad hand when I thought I was in a playable spot. Partner had a 2164 17 count, and since he thought I couldn't pass 2♠ he wanted to take the opportunity to emphasize his heart shortness. I thought he should just bid 3♦ but he thought he was too good. To me there is no such thing as too good for that bid once you decided not to jump shift. He did have a very nice 17, Ax K KQT9xx KQxx I think. My hand was JTxx Axxxx Jx xx I think. I am not so interested in whether he SHOULD show short hearts with the stiff king, or whether I SHOULD pass 2♠ with this hand even if it's allowed, but more in the theoretical merits of our points of view.
Should 2♠ be forcing?
Age old question Is it forcing?
#1
- - - T98765432 AQT8
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,085
- Joined: 2005-June-23
- Gender:Male
- Location:Las Vegas, NV
Posted 2007-April-20, 14:55
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,162
- Joined: 2006-July-10
- Gender:Male
- Location:Maryland
Posted 2007-April-20, 14:58
I agree with you.
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,153
- Joined: 2003-February-28
Posted 2007-April-20, 15:07
Undiscussed, I would treat this as forcing. A minimum opener should just pass 2D, going forward shows significant extras.
Playing it NF isn't terrible, I just think that the standard meaning of any bid after pd has preferred to your higher ranking suit shows extras.
Peter
Playing it NF isn't terrible, I just think that the standard meaning of any bid after pd has preferred to your higher ranking suit shows extras.
Peter
#4
- 5555
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,520
- Joined: 2003-September-04
- Gender:Male
Posted 2007-April-20, 15:13
My immediate reaction was it should be forcing, but since 3154 is a pattern easily bid out after a strong jump shift, opener is truly limited by bidding 2♣. On the other hand, I would think 1H 1S 2C 2H 3D should be forcing.
I think the actual hands were A9 K AQT9xx KQxx opposite JTxx AJ8xx xx Jx. I would have bid 3♦ or 2N with opener's hand (right-siding opposite ♠Jxx
).
Arend
I think the actual hands were A9 K AQT9xx KQxx opposite JTxx AJ8xx xx Jx. I would have bid 3♦ or 2N with opener's hand (right-siding opposite ♠Jxx
).Arend
The easiest way to count losers is to line up the people who talk about loser count, and count them. -Kieran Dyke
#5
- 5555
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,520
- Joined: 2003-September-04
- Gender:Male
Posted 2007-April-20, 15:14
pbleighton, on Apr 20 2007, 03:07 PM, said:
Undiscussed, I would treat this as forcing. A minimum opener should just pass 2D, going forward shows significant extras.
Playing it NF isn't terrible, I just think that the standard meaning of any bid after pd has preferred to your higher ranking suit shows extras.
Playing it NF isn't terrible, I just think that the standard meaning of any bid after pd has preferred to your higher ranking suit shows extras.
Everybody agrees 2♠ is showing significant extras.
The easiest way to count losers is to line up the people who talk about loser count, and count them. -Kieran Dyke
#6 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-April-20, 15:32
When a hand is limited to a non GFing hand they cannot make a forcing bid, period. Bramley and I were recently talking about the auction (1H) X (p) 1S (p) 2C (p) 2D. We agreed this bid was constructive, and good be as much as a 9 count. Given that, and the fact that the other hand has shown at least 18, it would seem to be forcing. But the other hand was such that pass was clearly the percentage action opposite partners range of hands because partner was limited by 1S, and thus should pass. Similarly reverses can be passed and are not forcing.
#7
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,153
- Joined: 2003-February-28
Posted 2007-April-20, 15:35
Quote
Everybody agrees 2♠ is showing significant extras.
Yes, and I think it's extra enough to be forcing
Peter
#8
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 875
- Joined: 2006-June-08
Posted 2007-April-20, 15:44
Definitely forcing for me. I would expect 3 spades, but the actual bid is imaginitive. I think passing is wooden.
#9 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-April-20, 15:47
Halo, on Apr 20 2007, 04:44 PM, said:
I think passing is wooden.
If partner is 3154 with 16 or 17 then where are you going? 2S is very likely the last plus. When you have no fit and no points and you're in one of your 7 card fits (the one that rates to play best) at the lowest level possible how can it be wooden to pass?
#10
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 18,167
- Joined: 2003-October-07
- Gender:Male
Posted 2007-April-20, 16:02
".........I am not so interested in whether he SHOULD show short hearts with the stiff king, or whether I SHOULD pass 2♠ with this hand even if it's allowed, but more in the theoretical merits of our points of view.
Should 2♠ be forcing? "
Great question.
Assuming I understand it you are simply asking about theory or alternative theories of bridge bidding within the constraints of natural, American style bidding. Here is one.
If, I repeat if, you save your jumpshifts for true jumps shifts that require high cards, not only distribution than you do not have to jump every time you like your hand.
If you play the shifting of suits to the next level by an opening bidder shows additional vaules then opener promises a third bid, provided responder does not pass, rebid his own suit or jump to game.
In your example responder rebid 2d which means opener promises a third bid. In other words 2D by you was forcing in this theory.
See Picture Bidding (1991) by Al Roth (deceased) and shifting suit theory.
Should 2♠ be forcing? "
Great question.
Assuming I understand it you are simply asking about theory or alternative theories of bridge bidding within the constraints of natural, American style bidding. Here is one.
If, I repeat if, you save your jumpshifts for true jumps shifts that require high cards, not only distribution than you do not have to jump every time you like your hand.
If you play the shifting of suits to the next level by an opening bidder shows additional vaules then opener promises a third bid, provided responder does not pass, rebid his own suit or jump to game.
In your example responder rebid 2d which means opener promises a third bid. In other words 2D by you was forcing in this theory.
See Picture Bidding (1991) by Al Roth (deceased) and shifting suit theory.
#11
- - - T98765432 AQT8
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,085
- Joined: 2005-June-23
- Gender:Male
- Location:Las Vegas, NV
Posted 2007-April-20, 16:03
Jlall, on Apr 20 2007, 04:47 PM, said:
Halo, on Apr 20 2007, 04:44 PM, said:
I think passing is wooden.
If partner is 3154 with 16 or 17 then where are you going? 2S is very likely the last plus. When you have no fit and no points and you're in one of your 7 card fits (the one that rates to play best) at the lowest level possible how can it be wooden to pass?
He meant John Wooden would pass, and he was a great winner. Thanks for the compliment.
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
#12
- - - T98765432 AQT8
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,085
- Joined: 2005-June-23
- Gender:Male
- Location:Las Vegas, NV
Posted 2007-April-20, 16:06
mike777, on Apr 20 2007, 05:02 PM, said:
".........I am not so interested in whether he SHOULD show short hearts with the stiff king, or whether I SHOULD pass 2♠ with this hand even if it's allowed, but more in the theoretical merits of our points of view.
Should 2♠ be forcing? "
Great question.
Assuming I understand it you are simply asking about theory or alternative theories of bridge bidding. Here is one.
If, I repeat if, you save your jumpshifts for true jumps shifts that require high cards, not only distribution than you do not have to jump every time you like your hand.
If you play the shifting of suits to the next level by an opening bidder shows additional vaules then opener promises a third bid, provided responder does not pass, rebid his own suit or jump to game.
In your example responder rebid 2d which means opener promises a third bid. In other words 2D by you was forcing in this theory.
See Picture Bidding (1991) by Al Roth (deceased) and shifting suit theory.
Should 2♠ be forcing? "
Great question.
Assuming I understand it you are simply asking about theory or alternative theories of bridge bidding. Here is one.
If, I repeat if, you save your jumpshifts for true jumps shifts that require high cards, not only distribution than you do not have to jump every time you like your hand.
If you play the shifting of suits to the next level by an opening bidder shows additional vaules then opener promises a third bid, provided responder does not pass, rebid his own suit or jump to game.
In your example responder rebid 2d which means opener promises a third bid. In other words 2D by you was forcing in this theory.
See Picture Bidding (1991) by Al Roth (deceased) and shifting suit theory.
Uh....lol. Any Bill Simmons fans out there? That was a solid 93 on the unintentional comedy scale.
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
#13
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 372
- Joined: 2006-December-04
Posted 2007-April-20, 16:17
Opener promises a 3rd bid when responder takes simple preference!?
Anyway, I would consider it NF for the reason Jlall pointed out... opener failed to jump shift and establish a game force, so this cannot be forcing.
Anyway, I would consider it NF for the reason Jlall pointed out... opener failed to jump shift and establish a game force, so this cannot be forcing.
#14
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 875
- Joined: 2006-June-08
Posted 2007-April-20, 16:27
jdonn, on Apr 20 2007, 05:03 PM, said:
Jlall, on Apr 20 2007, 04:47 PM, said:
Halo, on Apr 20 2007, 04:44 PM, said:
I think passing is wooden.
If partner is 3154 with 16 or 17 then where are you going? 2S is very likely the last plus. When you have no fit and no points and you're in one of your 7 card fits (the one that rates to play best) at the lowest level possible how can it be wooden to pass?
He meant John Wooden would pass, and he was a great winner. Thanks for the compliment.
Debate is healthy.
So in this world where we keep the auction open on more or less nothing, I have to leap around with no fit to move things on? Well if it works for you, you are no doubt always right.
#15 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-April-20, 16:40
Halo, on Apr 20 2007, 05:27 PM, said:
Debate is healthy.
So in this world where we keep the auction open on more or less nothing, I have to leap around with no fit to move things on? Well if it works for you, you are no doubt always right.
So in this world where we keep the auction open on more or less nothing, I have to leap around with no fit to move things on? Well if it works for you, you are no doubt always right.
You would agree I suppose that partner can have 5 or 6 points right? And you would agree I suppose that with about 18+ opener would have jumpshifted already, which limits him to about 17 points right?
Why can the hand that might have 5 or 6 points not pass a bid by the guy who has at most 17 points when he knows his rough shape? If you had enough to game force initially you would not have made a non forcing bid. That is the key. You won't need to "leap around" to keep things moving because you cannot have a hand strong enough to game force now when partner has not shown anything extra and you have already made a non forcing bid.
To be honest I don't see how this can be debatable. One hand has limited his hand by making a non forcing bid in the auction already (2C) and shown his rough shape. The other hand has a minimum that is well below what is needed for game opposite the limited hands maximum. Spades might be the best fit. It is not logically possible that 2S can be forcing in this context.
#16
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 875
- Joined: 2006-June-08
Posted 2007-April-20, 16:44
Difference of philosophy?
Why am I jump shifting with a singelton in the suit of a 5/6 point partner? I am happy to learn about different perspectives and not keen on dogmatic certainty.
Why am I jump shifting with a singelton in the suit of a 5/6 point partner? I am happy to learn about different perspectives and not keen on dogmatic certainty.
#17
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 372
- Joined: 2006-December-04
Posted 2007-April-20, 16:48
Because if you wanted to be in game at all costs, you would have jump shifted and not risked hearing partner pass 2C.
#18
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 875
- Joined: 2006-June-08
Posted 2007-April-20, 16:50
goobers, on Apr 20 2007, 05:48 PM, said:
Because if you wanted to be in game at all costs, you would have jump shifted and not risked hearing partner pass 2C.
Where did I say I wanted to be in game at all costs? Jump shift more says that to me.
#19 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-April-20, 16:56
Halo, on Apr 20 2007, 05:44 PM, said:
Difference of philosophy?
Why am I jump shifting with a singelton in the suit of a 5/6 point partner? I am happy to learn about different perspectives and not keen on dogmatic certainty.
Why am I jump shifting with a singelton in the suit of a 5/6 point partner? I am happy to learn about different perspectives and not keen on dogmatic certainty.
Ok...i'll try one more time...
The 2C rebid is not forcing. If you had enough to force to game you would not have bid 2C for this reason (because partner can pass, terminating the auction, below game).
The 2D rebid did not show anything extra. The minimum is still the same, all that is known is that diamonds are preferred over clubs (though a false preference is possible, it is not possible with a minimum response).
The 2S bid... you are arguing is forcing? What has changed where you could not force over 1H but you can now force over 2C? Your knowledge that partner prefers diamonds to clubs is enough to enable you to force? This does not logically follow, hopefully you can see this. You cannot have a hand worth a force over 2D in context of having a 2C bid. All you can have is a maximum for your 2C bid, about 16 or 17, possibly some 18s. If you have this hand you do not have a game force. Your hand is known to partner who will be in a very good position to judge what to do. If he has say a 4522 6 count it will be obvious to pass.
You may not be keen on dogmatic certainty, but there is always a right or a wrong in a given situation. Sometimes this right or wrong can not be reasoned accurately enough to be determined and you have to go on what your limited resources and experience comes up with, but this is not one of those times. Here there is clearly a right and clearly a wrong, and I'm not going to sugar coat things because you're not "keen on it." In this case, I am certainly right, sorry. This is not a matter of philosophy.
#20
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 875
- Joined: 2006-June-08
Posted 2007-April-20, 17:02
Ok...i'll try one more time...
When I opend 1D that wasn't forcing...so what.
When I opend 1D that wasn't forcing...so what.