[awm]

3♣-X-5♣-Pass

Is this pass forcing?

Edited: What I mean is, do you prefer to play this pass as forcing in an established partnership. Not "would you assume this pass is forcing opposite a random BBO expert?"

[Free]

no, why would it be???

[han]

What kind of question is this?

[jdonn]

This is not nearly as crazy a question as it would seem to someone who hasn't thought about it before. There is a very very good case for playing pass as forcing. But still it takes an agreement, you can't just assume it.

I know several experts who play this as forcing.

[han]

OK, so is the question instead "do you prefer to play pass as forcing here?"?

[jdonn]

han, on Apr 13 2008, 12:22 PM, said:

OK, so is the question instead "do you prefer to play pass as forcing here?"?

I never have played it before so it's hard to say. Lets say when I first heard of it I thought it was insane. Now I bet if I got into a discussion about it with someone who feels strongly it should be forcing, my mind could be changed.

[kfay]

This is the least forcing pass I've ever seen.

[cherdano]

For some reason it makes more sens to me to play (3♣) 3x (5♣) P as forcing.

[pclayton]

Pass should be forcing if the 5♣ bidder was a passed hand. Otherwise, only by agreement.

[sceptic]

If opps knew you play this as forcing, would it not be easy to always bid 5 of a minor after the double?

[CSGibson]

sceptic, on Apr 13 2008, 09:36 PM, said:

If opps knew you play this as forcing, would it not be easy to always bid 5 of a minor after the double?

That's kind of faulty logic.

They are bidding 5 clubs when they think they are making 5 clubs whether you always have a forcing pass or not.

If they aren't making 5 clubs, then the forcing pass agreement actually makes it less appealing to jump up the levels on hands you are pre-sacrificing because it lowers the chances of you actually buying the contract undoubled (small chance that it might be) or having them go on to a good contract.

[benlessard]

Not FP. I think FP are underused so im sure there is plenty of sequence where its not FP but should be FP, however i dont think this one is one of them.

[effervesce]

NF.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

no, we dont play it as forcing.

I see some merrits, if the vulnerability is right,
i.e. they are green, we are red.
At any other vulnerability, those merrits loose a lot
of weight.

It also depends on what are your min. requirements
for a t/o in direct seat, if you require a good opening
to act, say +15, and you follow those guidelines rigid,
than playing pass as forcing should work out ok most
of the time, but most partnership make the t/o lighter
not stronger.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[kfay]

pclayton, on Apr 13 2008, 09:39 PM, said:

Pass should be forcing if the 5♣ bidder was a passed hand. Otherwise, only by agreement.

I disagree with this. Then we're also a PH.... possibly a worse one.

[pclayton]

kfay, on Apr 14 2008, 06:43 AM, said:

pclayton, on Apr 13 2008, 09:39 PM, said:

Pass should be forcing if the 5♣ bidder was a passed hand. Otherwise, only by agreement.

I disagree with this. Then we're also a PH.... possibly a worse one.

Do I need an opening hand to make a FP?

[whereagles]

I don't think

6♣ dbl 7♣ pass

is forcing, let alone 3-X-5-p

[kfay]

pclayton, on Apr 14 2008, 09:45 AM, said:

kfay, on Apr 14 2008, 06:43 AM, said:

pclayton, on Apr 13 2008, 09:39 PM, said:

Pass should be forcing if the 5♣ bidder was a passed hand. Otherwise, only by agreement.

I disagree with this. Then we're also a PH.... possibly a worse one.

Do I need an opening hand to make a FP?

Obviously not. I'm just saying that I'd hope to have SOMETHING. And it's quite possible that I don't.

Maybe LHO made a heavy preempt and RHO passed a limitish hand 1st seat and now is presuming partner doesn't have much.

Forcing pass is 99% leading to disaster here. Double around 60%.

[inquiry]

I do not play this as forcing.

[cherdano]

I wouldn't be surprised if Eric Kokish recommends to play this sequence as forcing.