[awm]

1♦-2♣-2♥-P
2♠-P-3♠

Forcing or not? Assume fairly standard agreements with a good partner.

[MickyB]

Forcing because fits are nice.

[jdonn]

MickyB, on Dec 3 2007, 09:16 PM, said:

Forcing because fits are nice.

I don't get it. 1♠ p 2♠ isn't forcing.

[mike777]

Lawrence says forcing.

Opener can stop short of game after responder makes a 2/1 in competition only when:
1) Responder gives a preference.
2) Responder rebids 2nt
3) Responder rebids his own suit.
4) When opener rebids his own suit and responder raises.

[MickyB]

jdonn, on Dec 4 2007, 02:21 AM, said:

MickyB, on Dec 3 2007, 09:16 PM, said:

Forcing because fits are nice.

I don't get it. 1♠ p 2♠ isn't forcing.

Responder has shown a rather better hand on the original sequence.

[jdonn]

MickyB, on Dec 3 2007, 09:32 PM, said:

jdonn, on Dec 4 2007, 02:21 AM, said:

MickyB, on Dec 3 2007, 09:16 PM, said:

Forcing because fits are nice.

I don't get it. 1♠ p 2♠ isn't forcing.

Responder has shown a rather better hand on the original sequence.

1♠ 3♠ (limit raise) isn't forcing. Can't responder have that?

You can argue he would have to negative double on that, which I think is the one reasonable case that can be made to suggest this is forcing. I don't believe you should have to negative double if you don't want to, so I say nonforcing.

[mikeh]

I vote for forcing, because the alternative, when responder has a force, is either to cue bid and then bid spades, possibly at the 4-level, or to jump to 4♠ with no slam interest. While clearly one can conjure up hands on which the limit meaning works best, I'll pay to those by overbidding when I choose not to negative double with 4=5 in the majors (with 4=6 and enough to bid 2♥, I'll bid game anyway most of the time).

[the hog]

Agree that this has to be forcing. 2H shows a reasonable hand, even if you are playing nfb and there was no mention of that anyway. Now opener reverses! Don't tell me this can be nf!

[jdonn]

The_Hog, on Dec 4 2007, 12:11 AM, said:

Agree that this has to be forcing. 2H shows a reasonable hand, even if you are playing nfb and there was no mention of that anyway. Now opener reverses! Don't tell me this can be nf!

Reverses? And when you have a complete minimum 4252 what do you do? 4153 with three small clubs? When you call it a reverse you are implying he has raised the level, it was his cheapest possible bid!

I don't mind the idea of forcing, I would expect it to be majority. But I'm certain it's not what I would prefer.

[the hog]

jdonn, on Dec 4 2007, 12:15 PM, said:

The_Hog, on Dec 4 2007, 12:11 AM, said:

Agree that this has to be forcing. 2H shows a reasonable hand, even if you are playing nfb and there was no mention of that anyway. Now opener reverses! Don't tell me this can be nf!

Reverses? And when you have a complete minimum 4252 what do you do? 4153 with three small clubs? When you call it a reverse you are implying he has raised the level, it was his cheapest possible bid!

I don't mind the idea of forcing, I would expect it to be majority. But I'm certain it's not what I would prefer.

Edited - forget previous comment re reverse. It made no sense. Still think 2S followed by 3S is forcing as with a limited hand responder would have X.

[mikeh]

The_Hog, on Dec 4 2007, 12:22 AM, said:

jdonn, on Dec 4 2007, 12:15 PM, said:

The_Hog, on Dec 4 2007, 12:11 AM, said:

Agree that this has to be forcing. 2H shows a reasonable hand, even if you are playing nfb and there was no mention of that anyway. Now opener reverses! Don't tell me this can be nf!

Reverses? And when you have a complete minimum 4252 what do you do? 4153 with three small clubs? When you call it a reverse you are implying he has raised the level, it was his cheapest possible bid!

I don't mind the idea of forcing, I would expect it to be majority. But I'm certain it's not what I would prefer.

It is still a reverse. Responder is forced to give preference to D at the 3 level if he has no other bid to make. With "4252 / 4153 I agree you have a problem. With C stopper(s) you can rebid NT, else I guess you are forced to rebid 3D. I agree this is yuck, but still for me the 2S bid shows a reverse, though perhaps not quite as much as without intervention. Anyway as another argument, surely with a limited hand responder would usually make a neg X. cjf Mikeh's post.

It is not a reverse as far as I am concerned. Think of it this way: would 3♦ show extra values? No. So 2♠, being cheaper than a rebid of opener's suit is not a reverse. Compare to 1♣ 1♠ 2♦.. 2♦ is a reverse precisely because it is beyond the cheapest rebid available to opener in his own suit.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I voted forcing, because I liked the bullet,
which claimed that 2s showed add. strength,
... but this is not true, after all 2H was forcing
and opener had to say something.

Because of this the raise to 3S may be nonforcing,
both side could still be min, and one does stretch
sometimes to bid 2H.

And I dont believe, that a hand with 6-4 should make
a neg. X.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[helene_t]

That responder would have made a neg double with less than GF strength is a valid case for voting "forcing". I would expect standard to be non-forcing though because responder might raise on a 3-card. Maybe that's far-fetched?

[FrancesHinden]

Coming from my Acol background with its emphasis on limit bids, it is non-forcing. Although I would not expect it to be passed very often. You could agree to play it as forcing just to simplify other auction, and that's probably playable at aggregate (or even at imps), on the basis that an invitational hand plus a fit = game.

(I knew mikeh would say it was forcing)

I don't want to play that non-game-forcing 5-4 hands have to double, because you are then indifficulties after 1D (2C) x (P) 2NT where opener has a weak NT; you want 3H either to be a weak single-suiter or you want it to be forcing with 5 hearts; what you don't want is to be stuck with a limited 4-5 playing in 2NT instead of 3H.

It's not quite the same sequence, but the only one of these 'not obviously forcing' sequences that I play as forcing is

1D - 1S
2D - 2H
3H

this theoretically is non-forcing - another limit bid - but because responder is too often forced to bid 2H on a 3-card suit here, it's only really playable to have the raise and forcing, and get too high sometimes in the 4-4 heart fit.

[Fluffy]

Forcing because invitational+ hands that commit themselves to the 3 level before knowing there is a fit, play at least game when they find it.

[SoTired]

I voted forcing because:
1) with 5♥/4♠/11hcp, you can make a neg dbl
2) if 3S is not forcing and u have GF values, then to explore slam, u must make an advance q-bid and later bid 4S, which might be confusing as to spade length. Or jump to 4S and miss exploring for slam.

All because of an innocuous 2C overcall.

[ArcLight]

I am confused, why is 2♠ not a reverse?
Pard has to bid at the 3 level. Doesnt this promise extra strength?
Since pard made a 2/1 (in competition) he probably has a decent hand (not 5-8) so maybe less is needed for a 2♠ bid, but shouldn't it still be more than a minimum?

[helene_t]

ArcLight, on Dec 4 2007, 03:08 PM, said:

I am confused, why is 2♠ not a reverse?
Pard has to bid at the 3 level. Doesnt this promise extra strength?
Since pard made a 2/1 (in competition) he probably has a decent hand (not 5-8) so maybe less is needed for a 2♠ bid, but shouldn't it still be more than a minimum?

No, it is forcing but it does not promise extra values. What else is opener supposed to do with some 4252 12-count?

The situation is different from an uncontested reverse because
- If opener want to rebid diamonds it will be at the 3-level. Obviously he cannot do that on a 5-card
- He should try to avoid bidding 2NT with a club stopper.

[Gerben42]

Not forcing, maybe:

---

Opener will be pessimistic with a singleton ♥ in this auction and might pass.

[Fluffy]

ArcLight, on Dec 4 2007, 01:08 PM, said:

I am confused, why is 2♠ not a reverse?
Pard has to bid at the 3 level. Doesnt this promise extra strength?
Since pard made a 2/1 (in competition) he probably has a decent hand (not 5-8) so maybe less is needed for a 2♠ bid, but shouldn't it still be more than a minimum?

A reverse is when the rebid goes above repeating the first suit. To repeat your first suit here you would need to bid 3♦, hence 2♠ is not a reverse.