[andych]

In my understanding, 3rd suit by opener is non-focing in SAYC. But in European methods (e.g. Norway), 3rd suit by opener is forcing. Am I right?

e.g. 1H 1S
2C (forcing)

For 3rd suit forcing, what is the subsequent treatment? Does jump by opener guarantee 5-5? How does responder invite given he is forced?

Do you think 3rd suit forcing is good or not?

[skjaeran]

It's not standard to play this sequence as forcing in Norway. I play it as 95% forcing, that is, partner is allowed to pass with a very week hand without fit - that is 1-3 in my suits and say 7 hcp or less - this is more forcing in nature than most people here do.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

you are talking about the seq.

1H - 1S
2C?

2C is certainly nonforcing.

Partner should with eq. length go back to
the first suit, but he is allowed to pass.

In a natural system, i.e. a opening on the
1 level is 12-21 and if a suit resp. only 6+
you have to have bids for min. openers, and
partner should be able to pass.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[andych]

Found the 3rd suit forcing (Further after opening on 1-level) here
http://www.biddingquest.com/system/SD_Norw...nses%20to%202NT

Any better reference? Comments about the link? Any Norweigan features not mentioned?

[Lobowolf]

andych, on Aug 30 2008, 08:23 PM, said:

Found the 3rd suit forcing (Further after opening on 1-level) here
http://www.biddingquest.com/system/SD_Norw...nses%20to%202NT

Any better reference? Comments about the link? Any Norweigan features not mentioned?

The link posted shows that the sequence is non-forcing. In the section "Further after opening on 1-level," see the sub-section "Subsequent bidding by responder"

"Bids available for sign-off in part score: Pass, 1NT, 2 of suit previously bid"

Example given:

1♥ - 1♠;
2♣ - PASS/2H/2S = 6-10.

[barmar]

He gave the wrong link. The correct link is

http://www.biddingquest.com/system/SD_Norw...%20on%201-level

The first bullet there says:

Quote

3rd suit is forcing. May only be passed by a subminimum hand.

Of course, this is not really forcing. It's what skaeren said: 95% forcing.

But it also says that opener can rebid a new suit with a minimum hand. It seems that this forced to the 3 level if responder has support for opener's second suit, even if both are minimum (but not subminimum).

[skjaeran]

barmar, on Aug 31 2008, 05:14 AM, said:

He gave the wrong link.  The correct link is

http://www.biddingquest.com/system/SD_Norw...%20on%201-level

But here you also find:

Quote

1H - 1S
2D - 2NT, 3D, 3H, 3S = 11-12 points, inviting game. 

contradicting the 3rd suit forcing concept (other responses are OK, but over a 'forcing' 2D you have to raise to 3D on a (7+)8-count with 4-card support. I guess whoever wrote that on the site meant a 3rd suit bid at the 1-level.

[kgr]

andych, on Aug 30 2008, 02:42 PM, said:

In my understanding, 3rd suit by opener is non-focing in SAYC.  But in European methods (e.g. Norway), 3rd suit by opener is forcing.  Am I right?

e.g. 1H        1S
      2C (forcing)

For 3rd suit forcing, what is the subsequent treatment?  Does jump by opener guarantee 5-5?  How does responder invite given he is forced?

Do you think 3rd suit forcing is good or not?


       

I play 3rd suit forcing. (I don't know if it is good or bad).
A jump to 3♣ would be splinter with ♠-fit.

[Lobowolf]

kgr, on Aug 31 2008, 05:35 AM, said:

andych, on Aug 30 2008, 02:42 PM, said:

In my understanding, 3rd suit by opener is non-focing in SAYC.  But in European methods (e.g. Norway), 3rd suit by opener is forcing.  Am I right?

e.g. 1H        1S
      2C (forcing)

For 3rd suit forcing, what is the subsequent treatment?  Does jump by opener guarantee 5-5?  How does responder invite given he is forced?

Do you think 3rd suit forcing is good or not?


       

I play 3rd suit forcing. (I don't know if it is good or bad).
A jump to 3♣ would be splinter with ♠-fit.

I can't imagine it being good, but I honestly haven't spent much time thinking about it. Presumably 2♣ can be a minimum rebid by opener; I just can't see wanting responder to take another bid with any variety of dead minimums that include club support but not heart support, e.g. 5-1-3-4, 4-1-4-4, 4-1-5-3 etc. 6- or 7-counts.

[kgr]

Lobowolf, on Aug 31 2008, 07:55 PM, said:

kgr, on Aug 31 2008, 05:35 AM, said:

andych, on Aug 30 2008, 02:42 PM, said:

In my understanding, 3rd suit by opener is non-focing in SAYC.  But in European methods (e.g. Norway), 3rd suit by opener is forcing.  Am I right?

e.g. 1H        1S
      2C (forcing)

For 3rd suit forcing, what is the subsequent treatment?  Does jump by opener guarantee 5-5?  How does responder invite given he is forced?

Do you think 3rd suit forcing is good or not?


       

I play 3rd suit forcing. (I don't know if it is good or bad).
A jump to 3♣ would be splinter with ♠-fit.

I can't imagine it being good, but I honestly haven't spent much time thinking about it. Presumably 2♣ can be a minimum rebid by opener; I just can't see wanting responder to take another bid with any variety of dead minimums that include club support but not heart support, e.g. 5-1-3-4, 4-1-4-4, 4-1-5-3 etc. 6- or 7-counts.

Responder has to bid 2H with any minimum (can have singleton).
It is probably right that this is no ideal system, I played around 100 sessions with this partner and we never had this issue till now (2 Probable reasons: opps bid a lot if we are both minimum; We tend to rebid 1NT if possible to avoid this issue)

[FrancesHinden]

andych, on Aug 30 2008, 01:42 PM, said:

In my understanding, 3rd suit by opener is non-focing in SAYC. But in European methods (e.g. Norway), 3rd suit by opener is forcing. Am I right?

No.

Some people play it as forcing, but it's not standard and I would say uncommon.

1m - 1H - 1S is played as forcing by more people.