[Apollo81]

(p) 1d (2c) x
(3c) 4h p p
(5c) p

is opener's pass forcing?

[TylerE]

I don't think it's forcing, since opener has strong ways of getting to 4♥ over 3♣.

[jdonn]

Definitely forcing. It's not just about what we have bid, look at the opponents' auction, RHO of opener's tried to stop in 3 and let himself be pushed to 5. The odds he is simply walking the dog on some huge hand are teeny compared to the odds he was just hoping we wouldn't bid game and is sacrificing.

[kfay]

In an ideal world I think yes.

This is clearly a sacrifice and when the opponents are definitely sacrificing I play forcing passes.

[JLOL]

yes

[awm]

Forcing.

Why did opener bid 4♥? It makes no sense that he was trying to sacrifice. Sacrifice over what? 4♥ is below 5♣, the opponents have already exchanged plenty of information, and it sounds like the strength is equally divided (or opener's side has more).

So 4♥ was bid to make. This by itself is usually enough to create a forcing pass. Also, if opener has some freak hand where he was hoping to make 4♥ based on shape (like a 5-6 in the reds) he probably would've already bid 5♦ over 5♣. So the pass suggests he was bidding to make based on values. This reinforces the idea that pass should be forcing.

[Echognome]

jdonn, on Feb 11 2009, 01:30 PM, said:

Definitely forcing. It's not just about what we have bid, look at the opponents' auction, RHO of opener's tried to stop in 3 and let himself be pushed to 5. The odds he is simply walking the dog on some huge hand are teeny compared to the odds he was just hoping we wouldn't bid game and is sacrificing.

Agree with this reasoning.

[skjaeran]

Clearly forcing. For reasons explained by Josh and others above.

[OleBerg]

Not forcing.

Opener should be allowed to gamble 4♥ with playing strength, something like:

♠ x
♥ Kxxx
♦ AQJxxx
♣ xx


A double by opener would not be penalty, but simply show that 4♥ were bid to made (typically (semi-)balanced and strong). Sometimes partner can bid 5♥ with the right values.

[dake50]

Pass over 5C shows 0-1c club(CA), not particularly looking higher. X if not. Cannot imagine partner passing here so acting as 'forcing pass' even not defined such.

[Edmunte1]

Obviously forcing as long as we bid a voluntary game and opps are sacrificing to level 5

[Fluffy]

yes, forcing

but I would add: focing unless opponents are vulnerable and we are not.

[uday]

Did the negative X guarantee 4+4+ in the majors? The Master Solvers Club in the Bridge World seems to be full of people who blithely make such doubles with 43 in the majors.

If it didn't, would opener still jump to 4H with only 4 hearts?

What would opener do with a light shapely 6-5 hand with 5 hearts?

How light could negative doubler be for his double ( with perfect shape? )

I'm of course coming around to claiming that since responder might have "nothing" , and since opener must bid game here with all light 6-5s and well as with more balanced hands with extras, it is weird to think that the FP could be intelligently used here.

Another way to look at it is:

IF this is a FP, opener is inviting 5. But has he shown anything about his hand type? How can responder make an intelligent decision?

FPs dont make any sense unless the guy being "F'd" has some basis for a decision.

[InTime]

100% forcing. Look at the auction. The 1♦ opener's partner gave a negative double (showing some life). The 2♣ overcaller's partner did not give a cue-bid raise to 3♣ - so his raise must be limited. Obviously, the 5♣ is a sacrifice.
If partner would wanted to sacrifice, he would first bid 3♥ and then 4♥ if needed. 4♥ must be a strong bid. With his pass he is looking towards his partner for help. He has done his work. Partner must now act.
Regards

[jdonn]

No offense to anyone but it's really awful to think this isn't a forcing pass.

Look at LHO's (assuming we are the negative doubler) bidding!!!

"I would like to play this hand in 3♣."
...
"Now that the opponents have bid game, I would like to play this hand in 5♣."

He is sacrificing! So pass is forcing. The observation that the opponents are sacrificing is 100% indisputable. To think pass isn't forcing you have to completely ignore that.

Everyone so far who has said not forcing has tried to analyze what our partner has, or what he could have done. But how our side got to game is 100% irrelevent, you don't even have to consider it. The only reason to consider it now is to decide what partner might have for his forcing pass.

[uday]

I'm convinced but i can't UNDO my vote

I was sure I was right until I spoke to FG, who said pretty much what Jdonn said.

It is an FP situation bec. of the weird 5C call, which trumps everything else.

Had overcaller bid 5C (not what happened here) FG says it would not create a force.

Glad this didn't happen to me at the table before I ran into this thread.

[H_KARLUK]

Not really. Okay jumped to 4♥, then strong free rebid likely 5-5 in reds. But why could not use cheaper 4♣ ?

[Phil]

Yeah. File under:

1. Weird auctions are forcing (like some yahoo reraises a preempt or makes a 2nd raise).

2. When a passed hand sacs, it creates a force.

[jdonn]

uday, on Feb 12 2009, 12:08 PM, said:

I'm convinced but i can't UNDO my vote

I was sure I was right until I spoke to FG, who said pretty much what Jdonn said.

It is an FP situation bec. of the weird 5C call, which trumps everything else.

Had overcaller bid 5C (not what happened here) FG says it would not create a force.

Glad this didn't happen to me at the table before I ran into this thread.

Sorry if I was hard on anyone. I would definitely agree with you (meaning your original answer) if west had made a stronger raise (like say 2NT showing limit raise+ in clubs), since then he could have been intending to bid 5 all along. Or if, as Fred said, the overcaller had bid 5 himself.

[OleBerg]

jdonn, on Feb 12 2009, 06:43 PM, said:

No offense to anyone but it's really awful to think this isn't a forcing pass.

Look at LHO's (assuming we are the negative doubler) bidding!!!

"I would like to play this hand in 3♣."
...
"Now that the opponents have bid game, I would like to play this hand in 5♣."

He is sacrificing! So pass is forcing. The observation that the opponents are sacrificing is 100% indisputable. To think pass isn't forcing you have to completely ignore that.

Everyone so far who has said not forcing has tried to analyze what our partner has, or what he could have done. But how our side got to game is 100% irrelevent, you don't even have to consider it. The only reason to consider it now is to decide what partner might have for his forcing pass.

LOL