[Fluffy]

All vulnerable IMPs

1♥-(2♣)-2♦-(pass)
2♠-(pass)-3♥-(pass)
...


2♦ is negative free bid.

is 3♥ forcing?

[ArtK78]

That depends.

Was 2♠ game forcing? If yes, then 3♥ is forcing (obviously).

But, just as obviously, if 2♠ was not game forcing, then responder should be allowed to take a preference without being forced to game.

[mich-b]

2♠ is GF.

[Codo]

2 ♠ is game forcing.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I am pretty sure, 2S for us would just show values
(stopper showing towards 3NT) and inv. to game,
and not yet game forcing.
But 3H is game forcing. Because it showes add. strength,
since with a min hand, responder could and should just
rebid his diamonds.

The option that 3H is a mere preference does not really
count, because 2S does not show 4 cards.
Why should it? 2D basically denied a 4 card spade suite,
otherwise there would have been a neg. X instead of 2D.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[the hog]

P_Marlowe, on Jul 23 2009, 02:17 PM, said:

Hi,

I am pretty sure, 2S for us would just show values
(stopper showing towards 3NT) and inv. to game,
and not yet game forcing.
But 3H is game forcing. Because it showes add. strength,
since with a min hand, responder could and should just
rebid his diamonds.

The option that 3H is a mere preference does not really
count, because 2S does not show 4 cards.
Why should it? 2D basically denied a 4 card spade suite,
otherwise there would have been a neg. X instead of 2D.

With kind regards
Marlowe

Uwe, your post doesn't make sense, entschuldigung. If repsonder made a non forcing nfb, then he suddenly can't convert it to forcing with a 3H bid.
If 2S was a g/f as i believe, then 3H is forcing, of course.

[P_Marlowe]

The_Hog, on Jul 23 2009, 03:04 AM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Jul 23 2009, 02:17 PM, said:

Hi,

I am pretty sure, 2S for us would just show values
(stopper showing towards 3NT) and inv. to game,
and not yet game forcing.
But 3H is game forcing. Because it showes add. strength,
since with a min hand, responder could and should just
rebid his diamonds.

The option that 3H is a mere preference does not really
count, because 2S does not show 4 cards.
Why should it? 2D basically denied a 4 card spade suite,
otherwise there would have been a neg. X instead of 2D.

With kind regards
Marlowe

Uwe, your post doesn't make sense, entschuldigung. If repsonder made a non forcing nfb, then he suddenly can't convert it to forcing with a 3H bid.
If 2S was a g/f as i believe, then 3H is forcing, of course.

Ok, maybe wrong / cryptic wording:
A little bit shorter - 2S invites game, 3H accepts the invite,
offering partner to play 4H, but partner can still say, that
he prefers to play 3NT / 5D.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[pooltuna]

after a NFB the only forcing bid should be to qbid the opponent's suit provided the bidding showed at least 5 cards in the suit or a fit. In this case no, 3♥ is not forcing. As a caveat I do not use NFB but it does not make logical sense to use a NFB and expect partner to take subsequent bids to be forcing.

[barryallen]

Unlike many I prefer nfb's and in situations such as these would try and differentiate between sign off and forcing. Having 3♣ available as a force would allow me 3♥ as weak 2 card support and partner requiring more than shown to be comfortable to proceed to game.

[jillybean]

3♥ is showing preference, 2254
I'm more interested in 2♠ gf or nf?

[peachy]

3H is just cooperating and making the most descriptive bid responder can make, perhaps with Qx hearts. The aspect of "forcing" was already there when opener bid 2S. Now, responder is not the one who makes a forcing call and there is no need to, either, because opener already had established gameforce.

[blackshoe]

[pedant]If opener has made a game forcing call, then any call below game by either player is forcing.[/pedant]

I suppose one could argue that's just another way of saying what peachy said.

[helene_t]

2♠ is certainly forcing (it can't be right if s/he needs to bid 3♠ to force), but I don't think it is game forcing. To make it game forcing, the NFB would need to have a quite narrow range, like 8-11, and I think that a broader range like 6-11 is more common. Then opener needs tpo be able to show extras without necesarily forcing to game.

[mike777]

I play nfb but must admit this auction has never come up or been discussed.

With no discussion I would take 3h as a minimum showing preference. 2s shows a very good hand.

[Codo]

I really do not understand some comments here.

What do you have for a 2 ♠ bid?
Just enough to look for the best partial?

Partner did NOT double 2 Club but bid 2 ♦. So, a simple question: How many spades does he have?
4? 5? 6? Or maybe fewer?

There is zero sense in playing 2 Spade as non gameforcing. Pd denied a fit for both majors, so when you are looking for a safe harbour, pass or bid 2 ♥. There is no chance that you can improve your partial with 2 ♠.

[Cascade]

Codo, on Jul 26 2009, 11:39 PM, said:

I really do not understand some comments here.

What do you have for a 2 ♠ bid?
Just enough to look for the best partial?

Partner did NOT double 2 Club but bid 2 ♦. So, a simple question: How many spades does he have?
4? 5? 6? Or maybe fewer?

There is zero sense in playing 2 Spade as non gameforcing. Pd denied a fit for both majors, so when you are looking for a safe harbour, pass or bid 2 ♥. There is no chance that you can improve your partial with 2 ♠.

You might however want to invite game.

As I wrote in another thread I do not believe that 2♦ here denies four spades so a spade fit is possible.

We play that a reverse after a Negative Free Bid is a one round force just as a reverse is a one round force after a one over one response.

[aguahombre]

Cascade, on Aug 9 2009, 02:16 PM, said:

As I wrote in another thread I do not believe that 2♦ here denies four spades so a spade fit is possible.

I believe that in order for 2D to NOT deny 4 spades, the bid cannot be a real NFB, but rather at least a one round force.

[Cascade]

aguahombre, on Aug 10 2009, 09:24 AM, said:

Cascade, on Aug 9 2009, 02:16 PM, said:

As I wrote in another thread I do not believe that 2♦ here denies four spades so a spade fit is possible.

I believe that in order for 2D to NOT deny 4 spades, the bid cannot be a real NFB, but rather at least a one round force.

Why?

[Winstonm]

Why are so many playing negative free bids?

[the hog]

Cascade, on Aug 10 2009, 04:52 AM, said:

aguahombre, on Aug 10 2009, 09:24 AM, said:

Cascade, on Aug 9 2009, 02:16 PM, said:

As I wrote in another thread I do not believe that 2♦ here denies four spades so a spade fit is possible.

I believe that in order for 2D to NOT deny 4 spades, the bid cannot be a real NFB, but rather at least a one round force.

Why?

Because you could lose a S fit if opener does not bid again.