[jdonn]

Ok this time I have no tricks up my sleeve

4♦ 4♠ P 5♣

What is 5♣?

[TylerE]

I think it has to be natural. (NB: This is assuming the 5♣ bidder is not a passed hand)
That being said, I think it also shows interest in a slam. This is not a 'rescue' auction but interest in going furthur, oppisite the right stuff.


♠x
♥Axx
♦KQx
♣AQxxxx

May be a typical hand.

[han]

Natural!

[the hog]

Nice one. If it is natural, then how do you show support for S, cue C and ask for a D control? Some posters in the first post suggested 5S should ask for a D control. If this is the case, then how do you ask for good trumps? If your answer to this is KC, then what do you do as responder with a void?

We have always played it as a cue. This may not be ideal, particularly when you are dealt 7C to the KQJ and a stiff or S void, but hey, ***** happens! At least we both were always on the same wavelength.

[han]

I certainly agree that having an agreement is most important.

But we have 3 ways to make a slam try with spades: 4NT, 5D and 5S and only one bid to show clubs. I'm not willing to sacrifice that bid as well.

[Apollo81]

Natural!! 4♠ could be a 5 card suit. We must have a way to play in 5♣ when responder has 7 solid and a stiff or void in spades.

[whereagles]

The big question is whether it should be FORCING or not.

If it's forcing, it could be either nat or a cue. If not, then it must always be natural.

[helene_t]

I think it's pretty obvious that it's non-forcing. As TylerE says, it should be forward-going, though.

[pclayton]

Its natural by an unpassed hand. By passed hand it shows a spade fit and a source of tricks.

Its doubtful you'd move over 4♠ as a passed hand but its possible.

[bid_em_up]

helene_t, on Nov 9 2007, 11:41 AM, said:

I think it's pretty obvious that it's non-forcing. As TylerE says, it should be forward-going, though.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

If its non-forcing, it cannot be "forward-going" and if its "forward-going", it cannot be non-forcing. If you try and play it this way, you will practically always end up either one level too low or one level too high (and usually the latter).

It is better served to play it as forcing, imo, to either 5S (or higher) or 6C.

[jdonn]

The one thing that makes no sense to me is 'natural but forcing'. How can a game bid at a player's first turn to call be forcing if it's natural? I thought the whole argument of playing 5♣ natural is that many hands have long clubs and can't stand 4♠, and these certainly don't want to force the bidding any higher than needed.

[FrancesHinden]

bid_em_up, on Nov 9 2007, 08:43 PM, said:

helene_t, on Nov 9 2007, 11:41 AM, said:

I think it's pretty obvious that it's non-forcing. As TylerE says, it should be forward-going, though.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

If its non-forcing, it cannot be "forward-going" and if its "forward-going", it cannot be non-forcing. If you try and play it this way, you will practically always end up either one level too low or one level too high (and usually the latter).

It is better served to play it as forcing, imo, to either 5S (or higher) or 6C.

Maybe this is a terminology thing. I would also say it is non-forcing but forward going.

What I mean by that is that the 4S bidder will usually pass but is allowed to raise on the right hand. That is, with a very weak hand with clubs you just pass 4S and hope for the best. Given that a 4S bid over 4D could be anything from

KQJxxx
KQJx
xxx
-

to, say,

Axxxxxx
x
A
Axxx

I'd pass expecting to go off in 5C on the first hand and I'd cue 5D on the second.

[bid_em_up]

FrancesHinden, on Nov 9 2007, 02:58 PM, said:

Maybe this is a terminology thing. I would also say it is non-forcing but forward going.

It probably is just a matter of terminology/semantics.

When you bid 5C, do you expect to hear another call from the 4S bidder?

[mikeh]

bid_em_up, on Nov 9 2007, 02:43 PM, said:

helene_t, on Nov 9 2007, 11:41 AM, said:

I think it's pretty obvious that it's non-forcing. As TylerE says, it should be forward-going, though.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

If its non-forcing, it cannot be "forward-going" and if its "forward-going", it cannot be non-forcing. If you try and play it this way, you will practically always end up either one level too low or one level too high (and usually the latter).

It is better served to play it as forcing, imo, to either 5S (or higher) or 6C.

Of course you can. 'Forward-going' is a perfectly valid and useful description that can be applied to many sequences.

As Frances says, with a weak hand and long clubs, you just pass 4♠ and take your lumps, if lumps there be... sometimes partner actually has extras

So to bid 5♣ naturally, shows values as well as a good long suit and no fit for spades. As such it is non forcing and forward-going: partner will usually pass but is permitted to move forward with surprisingly good values in context.

If, otoh, 5♣ could be x xx xx QJ10xxxxx, then partner just closes his eyes, sighs quietly, and passes 99.99% of the time.

As for what 5♣ means, I would always assume an expert partner meant it as natural unless we had agreed otherwise, and it would have to be strongly insisted upon before I agreed to use it as a cue. I like Rubens rule that if a bid can be natural, and we have no other way of bidding the 'natural' hand, then it has to be natural.

We may not always prosper in spades when 5♣ is natural, but we can never survive in clubs (nor even get there) if 5♣ is a cue.

BTW, I also agree with Phil that 5♣ by a passed hand shows a good spade raise with chunky clubs and 5-level safety.

[bid_em_up]

Non-forcing and forward-going are mutually exclusive terms, in my book.

Either you intend for the 4S bidder to take another call....

Or you don't.

You cannot have it both ways.

The 4S bidder is always allowed to move on over 5C, with the "right" hand. That in and of itself does not make the 5C bid "forward-going".

[helene_t]

Huh? If it goes
1♠-(pass)-2♠*
That is non-forcing and forward-going as well.

[cherdano]

bid_em_up, on Nov 9 2007, 03:41 PM, said:

Non-forcing and forward-going are mutually exclusive terms, in my book.

Either you intend for the 4S bidder to take another call....

Or you don't.

You cannot have it both ways.

The 4S bidder is always allowed to move on over 5C, with the "right" hand. That in and of itself does not make the 5C bid "forward-going".

Then you should learn a new book. Really how can you be so stubborn, "forward-going" means what the majority (with experts given more weight) of bridge players thinks it means. Whenever I have heard it, it meant "non-forcing, but encouraging partner to bid on, not a sign-off". This is different to 2H (P) 3H.

[FrancesHinden]

how about this:

forcing
rarely passed
highly invitational
invitational
forward-going
constructive
non-forcing
sign-off

these are distinguished by the % of the time that partner passes, ranging from 0% to 100%-unless-he-has-missorted-his-hand-totally

[bid_em_up]

helene_t, on Nov 9 2007, 04:44 PM, said:

Huh? If it goes
1♠-(pass)-2♠*
That is non-forcing and forward-going as well.

Really? To where?

[Halo]

Interesting discussion.

I opted for natural, and it didn't occur to me that it was 'forward going', far less 'forcing'.

For me it says, you wanted us to risk playing in 4S and I'm telling you we are risking playing in 5C.

The passed hand thing is too far fetched for me.