[rbforster]

Partner and I have the following auction tonight:

1♦-(P)-1♠-(2♣)
P-(P)-?

Aside from bidding game or cue'ing here, what else is forcing?

2 of a new suit forcing, or just competitve?
3 of a new suit (jump) forcing, or just invitational 5/5?
jump raise of partner (3D)?
double could include GF hands, but which/any besides those you hope partner will sit with?

[Jlall]

Rob F, on Apr 2 2010, 02:31 AM, said:

Aside from bidding game or cue'ing here, what else is forcing?

Nothing.

Quote

double could include GF hands

Yes definitely.

[bluecalm]

I think that even auctions like:

1♥ pass 1♠ 2♦
pass pass 3♣

Should be purely competetive. I can't imagine passing my 6-4 there regardless of strength...
Those are probably the least clear, in your example I think everything (without jump) is non forcing.

[gnasher]

I think a jump in a new suit should be forcing. Apart from that, with a game-force you have to either double and bid again, or cue-bid.

[MFA]

gnasher, on Apr 2 2010, 02:20 PM, said:

I think a jump in a new suit should be forcing. Apart from that, with a game-force you have to either double and bid again, or cue-bid.

I agree, also with the implication that X+bid is forcing.

Also 1NT-transfer, then balancing with 3 of a new suit is competitive, as I play it.

[aguahombre]

Rob F, on Apr 2 2010, 01:31 AM, said:

1♦-(P)-1♠-(2♣)
P-(P)-?

Yeh only Double and Cue at this point, but new suit after doubling also forcing.

Before LOL'ing the following, think about it:

Pretend opener's pass is probably a hand which would have rebid 1NT, even though he might be slightly off from that.

Then pretend your balancing double is a NMF-type bid, even though it could be passed.

Now you can LOL. But, it does give a bit of perspective.

[jdonn]

3♥ on the auction you posted is forcing. Otherwise just double (well that's not really forcing haha) or cuebid.

[aguahombre]

jdonn, on Apr 2 2010, 10:10 AM, said:

3♥ on the auction you posted is forcing. Otherwise just double (well that's not really forcing haha) or cuebid.

yep...3H would look like whatever 3H would look like in your style if the unimpeded auction were:

1D-1S
1NT-3H

[jdonn]

aguahombre, on Apr 2 2010, 11:13 AM, said:

jdonn, on Apr 2 2010, 10:10 AM, said:

3♥ on the auction you posted is forcing. Otherwise just double (well that's not really forcing haha) or cuebid.

yep...3H would look like whatever 3H would look like in your style if the unimpeded auction were:

1D-1S
1NT-3H

No, despite you making that up it's not true.

[aguahombre]

Sorry, I meant to say it would look like what I would have shown on that auction. Didn't mean to imply everyone shows 5+5+ in the majors with GF values on that auction.

[jdonn]

Partner doesn't have to be balanced on this auction (he can be 1354 for example). Also partner can have extras (such as 16 with that shape). Also there is now the issue of club stoppers to worry about. They are not the same auction.

[aguahombre]

aguahombre, on Apr 2 2010, 08:39 AM, said:

Pretend opener's pass is probably a hand which would have rebid 1NT, even though he might be slightly off from that.

Then pretend your balancing double is a NMF-type bid, even though it could be passed.

Of course you are right on the above, Josh; hence the caviat about being slightly off from a 1NT rebid.

But again in context, since we don't use support doubles, the bigger hand with 1-3-5-4 could make an "informative" double --lest the auction die. 1-4-4-4 with weak opener is also out of the picture for us, so we are coming from different styles and it would be hard to agree on all actions, but easy to see why the different agreements are both workable.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

If you happen to play 2NT in this seq. as good-bad, than obv.
you have a way to differentiate the hand strength.

Appart from that, I would say, that a jump shift should be forcing,
bidding a new suit without a jump should show a nonforcing, but
constructive hand, and X should be for T/O.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Jlall]

Strongly disagree that a jump to 3H should be forcing, I would want to bid that with a 5-5 inv hand. If 2H is NF and non invitational, and GF hands can start with 3C or X or 4H, I don't really see why we need 3H as forcing that much. I'd much rather have one way to invite than a 4th bid with a forcing S+H hand.

[Phil]

Looking for another old thread I came across this: This

[Jlall]

Phil, on Apr 2 2010, 09:20 PM, said:

Looking for another old thread I came across this: This

2S is a reverse in this thread, obviously that's different than 2H here which is not a reverse.

[MFA]

I play a reverse as NF at the 2-level but GF at the 3-level.