[OleBerg]

Playing it as excactly invitational has some merit. Not nescesarily so hot when you bid it, but all the times you bid your forcing hand naturally, you are ahead.

For instance:

1♦-1♠
2♣-3♦ = Forcing has a lot of merit. With an invitational hand, you start with 2♥.

Also, if you play 3♥ in this sequence as forcing with Clubs, you can distinguish betweem a good and bad invitationel hand. (On 2♣ the bad invite bids 3♣, while the good bids 2♥.) It may be importent to distinguish betweem 8-9(10) point hands, that simply cannot bear to pass, and (10)11-12 hands, that are highly invitational.

[ASkolnick]

I currently play it as 4th suit and up as transfers. It does seem to get you the best of both worlds.

[skjaeran]

MickyB, on Jul 18 2008, 03:26 PM, said:

dburn, on Jul 18 2008, 01:32 PM, said:

You could, of course, play both.

After, say, 1D-1H-1S, 2C is a transfer to 2D, which opener bids if he would have passed simple preference. After opener does this, responder's continuations are invitational.

After 1D-1H-1S, 2D is artificial and forcing to game; continuations are more or less natural.

Peter Crouch, an English bidding theorist all of whose ideas are mad, is as far as I know the originator of this idea, his only sane contribution. It is a beautiful idea, and it works very well indeed.

Is this used on other sequences, or only when the "transfer" is to opener's first suit?

This is what we call the xyz-convention in Scandinavia.

After any 1x-1y-1z, 2♣ is a puppet to 2♦, planning to play there or make an invite, 2♦ is a conventional GF.

There are several schemes for continuations and the meaning of direct jumps after 1x-1y-1z.

[benlessard]

Quote

Playing it as excactly invitational has some merit. Not nescesarily so hot when you bid it, but all the times you bid your forcing hand naturally, you are ahead.

I kinda of lean toward the opposite. Some problems hand are if you play a very basic responses over the FSF.

1D-----1H
2C-----2S
3H-----???


1H-----1S
2D-----3C
3S-----??? here you had a big H fit. But know you are a bit screwed.

etc...

Here youll have a hard time setting trumps. Is 4m a cue or setting trumps. These problems are mostly because these auction are undisscussed.

[dbsboy]

I grew up with Invitational. But have learnt that Forcing to Game is a much better method. It just distinguishes all the invite from the FG stuff, which is often looked down upon in IMP games.

Clearly I think I need a 3C bid to show FG hand and C support

[OleBerg]

benlessard, on Jul 19 2008, 06:05 AM, said:

Quote

Playing it as excactly invitational has some merit. Not nescesarily so hot when you bid it, but all the times you bid your forcing hand naturally, you are ahead.

I kinda of lean toward the opposite. Some problems hand are if you play a very basic responses over the FSF.

1D-----1H
2C-----2S
3H-----???


1H-----1S
2D-----3C
3S-----??? here you had a big H fit. But know you are a bit screwed.

etc...

Here youll have a hard time setting trumps. Is 4m a cue or setting trumps. These problems are mostly because these auction are undisscussed.

Hi Ben,

I wrote "Exactly invitational".

Thus,

1♦-1♥
2♣-2♠
3♥

No problem, I pass, as partner didn't accept my invitation.

1♥-1♠
2♦

I simply bid 3♥ (Forcing) with a big heart fit.

Better than going via

1♥-1♠
2♦-3♣

which contains a lot of risk for not showing my hand with a forcing bid.

[Stephen Tu]

I don't often play it since 4sGF is so popular, but I've always had a preference to play Richard Pavlicek style as described in his system notes (http://www.rpbridge.net/rpbr.htm#09), where 2nd round jumps are GF & 4sF is usually invitational but occasionally employed on a few awkward GF hands. + some twists where he plays raising opener's minor to the 3 level as forcing.

What I see as the main benefits:
- in a slam inv sequence, it's unambiguous what responder wants the trump suit to be. After some 4sGF auctions it's unclear whether responder is setting trumps or is still groping for the right game. Opener has a clearer idea of what features to show if he knows responder's hand type, whereas after 4sF he has to cater to all possible GF hands and may show something that doesn't really help.
- responders balanced hand NT ladder is better defined, in terms of how much extras. You can show 18-19 w/ a F jump to 2nt & follow w/ 4nt. You can show some extra w/ 16-17 (double jump 3nt) instead of having somewhat of a guess after opener's 2nt or 3 level suit rebid after 4sf which might have extras also, but may be unsafe to pass 3nt if opener can be min.
- sometimes can stop lower when opener is min and not accepting invites.

4sGF sometimes keeps the auction lower but at the expense of murkiness sometimes when all GF hands are going through that, I basically feel it's overloaded.

[benlessard]

Quote

I wrote "Exactly invitational".

My mistake my post wasnt clear. What i meant was that the bidding sequence ive showned are problems for FSF (not for FSI) but that is because people dont discussed how to setup trump after opener made the 3rd bid. In theory on those hands FSF should be better placed because opener had the chance to make 3 meaningful bid and responder 1 wheiter in FSI both have made 2 significant bid.

If we compare sequence that take the same amount of space.
1D-----1S
2C-----2H (Gf)
3C ====== opener made 3 significant bid/ responder 1

to

1D-----1S
2C-----3C (Gf)======opener made 2 significant bids/ responder made 2

or

1D-----1S
2C-----2H (GF)
3D======= opener made 3 significant bid/ responder 1

to

1D-----1S
2C-----3D (Gf) ====opener made 2 significant bids/ responder made 2

its clear the bidding is more natural and simpler when there was a GF raise. But with a proper followed up (relays etc) i think regular FSF should in theory yield better results. Once opener already showed a big part of its hand its better that responder ask for further information (relay style) ) instead of sending information (natural bidding style).

The best example of this is.

1D----1S
2C----2H (Gf)
3S (showing exactly 3154 extra strenght)

here relay bidder will be happy, exact shape and pinpoint strenght is known.

But for natural bidders its a nightmare, trump isnt set and its not clear if 4C,4D are natural or cuebids, its going to be murky even for experienced partnership.

Im a firm believer into FSI because i hate playing at the 3 level for no reason.

1D----1H
1S----2C (FSI)

here instead of having plenty of way to show GF hands i prefer to be able to invite and be able to finish in 2D or in 2M. Another side benefit is when youre invitation is in unclear denomination.

1H----1S
2C----

many time here you are going to have invitationnal hand with unclear direction.

JTxxxx
Kx
Axx
Kx

FSI and pass or correct responses do wonders on hand like these.
Note that opener can be dead minimum and up to 17 so INV hands are going to be slightly more frequent than GF hands.

[gnasher]

benlessard, on Jul 22 2008, 07:42 AM, said:

1D----1S
2C----2H (Gf)
3S (showing exactly 3154 extra strenght)

here relay bidder will be happy, exact shape and pinpoint strenght is known.

But for natural bidders its a nightmare, trump isnt set and its not clear if 4C,4D are natural or cuebids, its going to be murky even for experienced partnership.

The problems of standard fourth suit forcing are real, but let's not exaggerate them. This sequence isn't murky in any of my partnerships, whether experienced or otherwise. 4♣ and 4♦ are natural; 4♥ is artificial and agrees spades.