[jillybean]

Comments please

Hand1.

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     -     -     1♦
 Pass  1♠    Pass  2♦
 Pass  3♣    Pass  Pass
 Pass  


Hand2.

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     -     Pass  1♣
 Pass  1♠    Pass  2♣
 Pass  3NT   Pass  Pass
 Pass  

[jillybean]

Thanks.
Hand1: 3♣ is forcing but not gf just 1 rf, we could stop in 3♦?
So North would need to bid 3♥ 4sf to force game after 3♦?

[skjaeran]

On hand1 3♣ is GF for me. It should be possible to reach 6♣ or 6♠.

On hand2 I agree with Justin. I've played 2♥ as NF in this sequence for ages, with 2♦ as a conventional forcing bid. With my most regular partner we do in fact play transfers here. Little practice with that this far, so I can't tell you how good it is.

[P_Marlowe]

#1 3C is game forcing, i.e. South cant pass,
unless you play something like 3rd suit forcing,
in which 3C shows an inv. hand with 5-5, in which
case North should not bid 3C

#2 You would like to check for a 4-4 fit in hearts,
South could hold 5 clubs and 4 hearts, i.e. either
North should bid 2D, if the partnership plays 3rd
suit forcing or 2H.
Elsewise, I dont have a problem with the auction.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean2, on Jan 26 2008, 01:39 AM, said:

Thanks.
Hand1:  3♣ is forcing but not gf just 1 rf, we could stop in 3♦?
So North would need to bid 3♥ 4sf to force game after 3♦?

No, game forcing.

There is not enough room, to allow 3C as
just forcing for one round.

An old rule: New suits at the 3 level are game
forcing, you can ignore the rule, but this requires
some artifical stuff.
But my advice would be, keep it simple, add the
artifical stuff only if you really need it.


With kind regards
Marlowe

[hotShot]

Hand 1:
To enter the 3 level opposite a minimum opening should show a hand at least very close to an opening bid. So i would say that 3♣ is GF.

Hand 2:
Seems to me that north has lost his partnership trust and expects south to pass GF bids so he's bidding game. So obviously I don't think that 3NT is a acceptable bid with the north hand.
If not agreed otherwise 2♥ is a new suit and should be forcing opener for one round.

[helene_t]

In SAYC, a new suit by an unlimitted responder is forcing except after a 1NT rebid by opener.

So North 2 could have bid 2♥ over 2♣. However, the understanding that 2♥ is forcing here is not universal. Some Dutch bridge teachers teach it as non-forcing and I believe the same is true in the UK.

In 1, 3♣ is a game force. New suit at the 3-level by an unlimited hand.

[ArtK78]

On the first hand, 3♣ is forcing. I do not think it is game forcing in SAYC, but it is certainly forcing one round. Responder could pass a 3♦ or 3♠ rebid by opener.

On the second hand, responder should not just assume that 3NT is the right contract. There are many possibilities - 3NT, 4♠, 4♥, 5♣, and, as shown on the actual hand, 6♣. Responder should make some forcing call. I play that a bid of the other minor in this auction is artificial and forcing (this allows the 2♥ rebid to be nonforcing). In SAYC, a new suit by responder is forcing, so 2♥ is the right call.

[Cascade]

As (many) others have said on the first hand 3♣ is forcing so south needed to bid again.

Even if you didn't know that you should want to bid again with that hand.

On general principles over 2♦ responder should not take another bid unless there is a realistic chance of game or perhaps when sure the contract can be improved. So most bids below game should be at least invitational or forcing. The exception is a repeat of responder's suit at the two-level and even then many pairs play weak jump shifts and as a consequence bidding 1Major and then repeating 2Major is constructive (better than a weak jump shift).

Here we have 14 hcp with a six-card suit when we might have had 11 or 12 or maybe even 10 with this distribution. So we are happy to bid on to game even over a different bid like 2NT or a new suit at the two-level that might only have invitational values.

1♦ 1♠
2♦ 2NT
3NT

1♦ 1♠
2♦ 2♥
3NT

These would be the auctions in these cases.

On the actual hand a preference to 3♠ with Jx or a bid of 3♥ fourth suit forcing are possible bids depending on partnership style. In my partnership we would bid 4th suit forcing here and reserve 3♠ for genuine three-card support.

It is not completely clear how the auction would develop. Responder would then have options of rebidding spades (based on the great suit), clubs (based on the extra length) or diamonds (based on A10 in support). Depending on the bids chosen and the optimism of the players you may or may not get to slam. 6♣ and 6♠ are reasonable slam but 6♦ is hopeless.

I wouldn't worry too much about missing slam here with only 28 hcp. If you bid this one then chances are you will go down in a lot of similar ones where the cards are not perfect.

On the second hand 3NT is wrong from responder. There are too many flaws:

1. We have not shown our fifth spade

2. We have not shown our hearts

3. We have no diamond stopper

4. We are slightly too strong with 16 hcp. There could easily be a good slam if partner is maximum for 2♣ with fitting cards.

2♥ seems like a good second bid for responder. It is forcing for one round and shows the distribution.

Opener then has a number of choices:

1. Showing the diamond stopper A10x is an excellent positional stopper that becomes two stoppers opposite very little from partner e.g. Jx

2. Rebidding an excellent club suit

3. Showing a preference for partner's spades with Jx

With so many options perhaps a fourth suit bid to get further description from partner is best from which slam might be bid

1♣ 1♠
2♣ 2♥
3♦ 4♣
4♦* 4♥*
5♣ 6♣

* cues

This is a possible sequence.

[matmat]

3♣ obviously gf

on the second hand it looks like N did not want to be passed in a forcing bid, so just guessed 3NT

[jillybean]

Thanks. Now how about the auction:

1♦:1♠
1N: 3♣

non forcing? (assuming we are playing checkback or nmf)

[helene_t]

Good question. Hardy's book describes this 3♣ as weak with 4♠ and 6♣, iow to play. Not sure what standard is, but it certainly is not forcing if we play NMF or CBS.

[whereagles]

agree with justin

[han]

jillybean2, on Jan 27 2008, 12:57 PM, said:

Thanks. Now how about the auction:

1♦:1♠
1N: 3♣

non forcing? (assuming we are playing checkback or nmf)

Many ways to play this, but I would never assume weak as Helene suggest. Either invitational or forcing. I like to play it as forcing but I wouldn't assume so without discussion (this is an auction I discuss when playing serious live bridge).

[vuroth]

P_Marlowe, on Jan 26 2008, 05:16 AM, said:

An old rule: New suits at the 3 level are game
forcing

An old rule I hadn't heard before. Thanks.

...

1♦ 1♠
1NT 3♣

My immediate (and likely incorrect) reaction is - how can this be anything but forcing? How does responder show a strong unbalanced hand except by jumping? (But what do I know?)

V

[skjaeran]

Hannie, on Jan 27 2008, 08:44 PM, said:

jillybean2, on Jan 27 2008, 12:57 PM, said:

Thanks. Now how about the auction:

1♦:1♠
1N: 3♣ 

non forcing?  (assuming we are playing checkback or nmf)

Many ways to play this, but I would never assume weak as Helene suggest. Either invitational or forcing. I like to play it as forcing but I wouldn't assume so without discussion (this is an auction I discuss when playing serious live bridge).

It's played as sign off by a lot of Norwegians, me included. With my most regular partner I've switched. Now it's 55+ GF, with 2NT a puppet to 3♣.

[jillybean]

to continue...

Does the rule "new suit by unpassed hand is forcing" apply in all situations.

I had this auction today,

1♣ 1♠
3♣ 3♦
swish!

[han]

That one is so incredibly forcing it hurts to see this auction. ARGHHHH!!