[vuroth]

Scoring: MP

1♦ 1♠
2♦ 2♥
?

---

[Fluffy]

duplicated :/

[Fluffy]

Some old people play this sequence as non forcing, but the common trend nowadays it sthat it is jsut foricng with better hearts than clubs.

Your rebid now is 3♦ since you don't have:

-3 spades for bidding 2♠
-4 hearts for bidding 3♥
-Clubs stopped for bidding 2NT
-Half a stopper in clubs to bid 3♣
-Doubleton honnor in spades for 2♠

So you rebid diamonds wich "could" be just 5 cards the round before, and it is a good suit after all. Secong best choice would be 3♣ to show something there but not enough for 2NT

[helene_t]

Yeah 3♦.

[vuroth]

Thanks.

[ArcLight]

Why is this now forcing when in the past it was not?
What if responder has a weak, shapely hand?

Isnt responder moe likely to have this kind of hand (weak) than a strong (forcing) hand?

[helene_t]

I think in the past people were more likely to bid 5-card suits twice than they are today, so responder would try to improve the contract by bidding new suits with weak hands.

Maybe more to the point, bridge bidding evolved from games like Whist where bidding was not about information exchange. When you have no partner, you just bid what think you can make. Since the introduction of contract bridge, there has been a slow evolution towards more an more forcing bids. Because of the demographics of the bridge community (most teachers learned the game in the stone age), the evolution has been so slow.

Until the introduction of online bridge, which made the younger generation more influential.

[suokko]

Idea is to pass with weak shapely hand. In IMP scoring you gain a lot by defining it forcing and lose very little.
In places where nearly all the games are MP non-forcing meaning is a lot more popular.

[Tola18]

The key is, 2d is nonforcing, and with the shown 6 cards should make even against a singelton. Thus, proceeding to bid on must be positive.


Of course, playing match points, where a playable contract in majors easily gives an edge over contracts in minor, MAY be an exception for intermediates and above... There is case for both standings. I presume every pair should discuss it.

[aguahombre]

Some old people have adapted

My (old person) replies are:
-3D
-2H is forcing
-It is an intermediate question, not a novice question because even though 2H is forcing to most everyone, you should discuss how far it forces.

[vuroth]

I guess the reason that I asked is that, at matchpoints, I wondered if 2♠ would ever be right. I bid 3♦ at the table, but in the post mortem I started to wonder if a spade partial was the right place to be, at MPs.

[aguahombre]

IMO, certainly a partscore in spades could be right. But responder could have a lot of hands for 2H, including slammish in diamonds without 5 or more spades, and your 3D call pretty-well covers the minimum nature of your hand and approximate shape. You are now well placed if partner rebids a long spade suit (6+ and strong), or anything else.

If 2H commits us to game or 4/level, then a 2S call over 2H will have not been helpful as to your shape or your strength.

[ArtK78]

I find this discussion interesting, since it seems that some of it is backwards.

In old-fashioned Standard American, a new suit by responder is forcing. So the 2♥ call is forcing.

However, I play that the 2♥ call is non-forcing, and I use a 3♣ call as an artificial force (extended new minor forcing).

If the 2♥ call is non-forcing, I think it is a close choice between passing 2♥, bidding 2♠ (a known 5-2 fit) or bidding 3♦.

[jdonn]

ArtK78, on Dec 9 2009, 01:47 PM, said:

If the 2♥ call is non-forcing, I think it is a close choice between passing 2♥, bidding 2♠ (a known 5-2 fit) or bidding 3♦.

If the 2♥ call is non-forcing, pass is quite obvious and anything else is quite bad. Partner should be 5-5, as why pull a 6 card suit with 5-4?

[ArtK78]

jdonn, on Dec 9 2009, 01:51 PM, said:

ArtK78, on Dec 9 2009, 01:47 PM, said:

If the 2♥ call is non-forcing, I think it is a close choice between passing 2♥, bidding 2♠ (a known 5-2 fit) or bidding 3♦.

If the 2♥ call is non-forcing, pass is quite obvious and anything else is quite bad. Partner should be 5-5, as why pull a 6 card suit with 5-4?

5404?

Partner is allowed to have a few major suit cards.

It helps to know how frequently partner will raise the 1♠ response with 3 cards. If he will do so often, then bidding over 2♦ has less to gain. But partner could hold 3 or 4 hearts on this auction.

[nigel_k]

I think you can bid 2♠ on a doubleton quite often in this sequence. With Qx Axx AJxxxx xx I would definitely prefer 2♠. The two small spades and diamond quality make 3♦ a bit better on the actual hand though.

[kenrexford]

2♥ IMO should be NF but not crap either. Not opposed to a raise.

Pass seems obvious with this hand.

This, of course, suggests several other tweaks, such as a GF 3♥ jump and some sort of sexy 2-bids initially.

[ONEferBRID]

After the rebid by Opener of his minor, I play : " Cheapest New Suit Bid" as forcing
( similar to NMF ):

1D - 1S
2D - 2H! = maybe artificial ( I think I'll use this as what Ken calls a sexy 2-bid )
??
2S = 3 cards Sp
2NT* = stop(s) in the other Major ( Hts ); same as in NMF
3C = 4 cards Cl
3D = none of others
3H = 4 cards Hts
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
*Note: Fluffy's 2NT defined it as stop(s) in the 4th suit ( Cl ), but then the 2H bid was interpreted as natural .
In NMF, the 4th suit is ALWAYS the other Major.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
So, my way, 2NT is Opener's easy rebid over 2H!.

[Jlall]

2S

[nige1]

vuroth, on Dec 9 2009, 08:59 AM, said:

Scoring: MP

1♦ 1♠
2♦ 2♥
?

---

IMO 2♠ = 10, 3♦ = 7.
I think 2♥ should be forcing but not game-forcing. If partner passes your bid, then you may prefer to play a higher-scoring contract at a lower level. ♠ may be a better than ♦ when partner is 6403 for example. Over 2♠, if partner feels like it, he can correct to 3♦ with a doubleton or more.