[helene_t]

Oops sorry the third option should be:

"should be forcing even with the 2♦ agreement"

Pick-up partnership, i.e. just playing extended expert standard or some such

Opps silent:
1♣-1♠
2♣-2♥*
2NT-3♠**

*Here we had not agreed whether 2♦ would have been a relay, i.e. a generic force
** Is this forcing?

[fred]

Here is how you should think about this IMO:

- If 2H is non-forcing then 3S is non-forcing
- If 2H is forcing then 3S is forcing

Whatever 2D means does not directly impact whether or not 3S is forcing.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[helene_t]

Thanks Fred, that makes sense.

Without special agreements, obviously 2♥ is forcing.

[awm]

I would say that 3♠ is non-forcing regardless. The reason is that 3♦ exists as a clearly forcing call, asking opener to clarify and tolerance for a major suit.

There are certainly responder hands which are less than game force with 6-4 in the majors (for example) where you want to find a 4-4 heart fit if one exists but would otherwise rather play in spades. Particularly on the "game invitational" variety of such hands it seems sort of silly to be forced to either miss the potential heart fit by rebidding 3♠ or pass 2NT when 3♠ is almost surely a better partial.

[fred]

awm, on Sep 20 2008, 06:00 PM, said:

I would say that 3♠ is non-forcing regardless. The reason is that 3♦ exists as a clearly forcing call, asking opener to clarify and tolerance for a major suit.

There are certainly responder hands which are less than game force with 6-4 in the majors (for example) where you want to find a 4-4 heart fit if one exists but would otherwise rather play in spades. Particularly on the "game invitational" variety of such hands it seems sort of silly to be forced to either miss the potential heart fit by rebidding 3♠ or pass 2NT when 3♠ is almost surely a better partial.

Your suggestion caters to an obscure hand (invitional with 6-4 in the majors) which is not exactly a nightmare to bid in the absense of your suggestion - either force to game or forget about the hearts.

Do you also think you should also play 3C=invitational just in case you happen to be dealt a 5413 or maybe 5422 invitational hand?

You could lump your forcing hands with these patterns into the same 3D bid you are forcing yourself to bid on most hands with 6+ spades.

While we are at it, I suppose you might as well bid forcing hands with at least 5+ in both majors the same way - just bid 3D on these hands too and free up the 3rd round 3H to describe a 5-5 invitational hand.

If your invitational hand happens to contain diamond length instead of heart length, you could bid 2D instead of 2H and make your invitational bid on the next round (using a 3rd round 3H as your all-purpose force in this case).

Congratulations - you now have the ability to "show everything" you could ever want to show in terms of invitational hands.

My alternative suggestion (playing 3S=forcing) caters to responder being able to state the nature of his game force a round earlier (and in many cases a level lower). Game forcing hands that lack direction can hedge with 3D (or just bid 3NT of course). So for me 3S means "spades!". If I wanted to say "spades?" I would bid 3D.

You are using 3D to say both "spades!" and "spades?". That is a bad thing. If you are also using 3D to say "hearts", "clubs", or maybe "clubs!" as well, that is considerably worse.

Whatever 3D means for you exactly, I can admit the obvious - you will outbid me on the 6-4 invitational hands. Can you admit the obvious that I will do better on the game-forcing and slam-going hands?

Sometimes it is right to sacrifice the ability to "show everything" in favor of being able to deal with the important hands effectively.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

coming from a Acol background, but now playing
something like 2/1, I would say NF.
I am assuming 2H as forcing, but GF is certainly
is certainly better, at least playing IMP, simplifying
slam auctions.

I think the mian question is, what kind of opening style
you are playing, if solid openings, than you wont have
lots of hands, which will pass 3S, if you regular garbage,
the amount of hands will increase.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[awm]

Some of this also depends on the meaning of 1♣-P-2♠.

Playing strong jump shifts, the hands with good enough spades that you have some interest in slam opposite a minimum opener with a singleton spade, you might've bid 2♠ at first turn. This gives you a pretty straightforward auction.

If you play 2♠ as reverse flannery on an invitational hand, then you don't need ways to show invites with 5+♠/4♥ which implies that a lot of sequences become forcing.

I agree that using 3♦ as a force helps on invitational hands and hurts on slammish hands. But I'm not sure Fred has his frequencies right; in particular:

(1) The hands where the forcing treatment wins aren't "all the game forcing hands." With a game force where you want to set spades, you can bid 4♠. With a game force where you want to offer choice of games, you can bid 3♦ and pass 3NT with confidence. The hands where the forcing treatment wins are the hands where you want to insist on spades even opposite a singleton and your hand is too good to bid 4♠. Sure, these hands exist. And sure, Fred's approach makes them easier to bid (assuming they didn't start with a SJS to begin with). But I don't think they're all that common.

(2) On the other hand, "invitational" hands are actually a pretty big range. Keep in mind that opener could have 4♥/6♣, and that you can make a pretty light game opposite that when you have a heart fit. On the other hand, if partner has some awful shape like 1246 opposite your 6♠/4♥ hand, you might not make a game even holding 26 hcp. So the non-GF range where you want to bid 2♥ here is actually quite wide (maybe as extreme as 6-13 hcp).

[helene_t]

When I made the bid I assumed it to be forcing, but my partner passed,

My thought was this: I had a GF 6-4. This must be quite a common hand type, and one which cannot start with a SJS.

An invitational 6-4 could pass 2N I suppose. I think Fred likes to play 2♥ as GF so that opener can rebid 2NT or 3♣ with some awkward hands without fear that responder passes.

[fred]

awm, on Sep 20 2008, 07:32 PM, said:

(1) The hands where the forcing treatment wins aren't "all the game forcing hands." With a game force where you want to set spades, you can bid 4♠. With a game force where you want to offer choice of games, you can bid 3♦ and pass 3NT with confidence. The hands where the forcing treatment wins are the hands where you want to insist on spades even opposite a singleton and your hand is too good to bid 4♠. Sure, these hands exist. And sure, Fred's approach makes them easier to bid (assuming they didn't start with a SJS to begin with). But I don't think they're all that common.

The forcing treatment also wins when responder has a hand in which either 3NT or 4S could be right facing a small singleton. I can bid 3S with these hands. If partner's hand really looks like notrump he can still bid 3NT and I can Pass. Otherwise he can bid 4S or cuebid accordingly.

You have to bid 3D with these hands. Opener will never bid 3S with a singleton spade and he will often bid 3NT instead. Then you have to guess whether or not to Pass. If it is clear not to Pass then you have to guess whether or not to cuebid.

The forcing treatment also wins because it is easier to remember. You never responded to my point as to whether or not you think other 3-level bids should be forcing or not (maybe because you noticed the semi-saracastic way I made this point!).

If yes, then your heavily overloaded 3D is going to cause you massive problems in my view. In no, then you are creating a memory problem for your partnership by playing that 3S is the only non-forcing 3-level action.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[mike777]

First off I guess I would never pass this in real life but as discussed in another thread...after 1c=1major=2c=2d can create a game force........(notice how that diamond suit is always lost .)
playing 1minor=2h as reverse flannery less than invite then:

1c=1s
2c=2h=invite

now:
2nt=3s I guess would be invite but tough to ever pass esp at imps.

[pclayton]

Kibbed this. 3♠ felt forcing.

Even if NF I don't think your pard should have passed.

[firmit]

Good question!
I was the one who passed. At the time - it felt right - but I am no expert. Yes - you had a good hand Helene , but I did not see 3S as forcing, regrettably.

I held something like: K xx KQxx KQJxxx
and - like I said - I felt rather contempt passing 3S (because I thought it was nf). 2H is obviously forcing, but how can 3S be? I thought 3D were the only forcing bid available...

I don't know...

I suspect a lot of "jeez - did you pass with that hand" comments now... and "3NT/4S wtp" - and yes - I voted "Monkey!"

Added:
After reading the answers a second time - I may have to agree that 3S may be best played as forcing. But I am not sure on the "memory problem" - new suit always forcing, is what I have been taught - so when rebidding your own suit, this is at best invitational (in this sequence obv. inv).

For non-experts, this simple rule is the first guideline in understanding a forcing sequence - I believe. Thus in the given auction - 3S would be GI (because of the F1 2H bid) and NF (because of the rebid in own suit).