[Cascade]

I played Bourke Relay for a little while but in some auctions we regretted giving up a natural suit bid.

When then tried a Polish idea of using 2NT as forcing on these auctions. This is our current agreement and works well for us.

I suspect the optimal agreement is to use some combination of 2NT and an unbid suit depending on the precise auction.

We don't play 2/1 GF so we use 2NT as a force after a two-level response as well.

2NT forcing obviously gives up on a natural invite. Consequently our only invites are to raise partner, rebid our own suit at the three level or to reverse into a new suit at the two-level.

If you want to play a suit as a force:

1♣ 1♦
2♣ 2Major seems free as an artificial force as opener normal does not have a major

1♣ 1Major
2♣ 2♦ is free as an artificial force (except that it is possible to have a diamond fit)

1♦ 1♥
2♦ 2♠ is free as a force

1♦ 1♠
2♦ ? This one is tricky as you can easily have a heart fit

1♦ 2♣
2♦ ? Tricky as well if 2♣ not GF since you can easily have a major fit

1♥ 1♠
2♥ ? 3♣ (or 3♦) are possible if opener does not usually bypass a second suit. I reasonably often do with six hearts so it can be problematic.

1♥ 2min
2♥ ? a fit in spades is possible

1♠ 2any
2♠ ? again problematic

Perhaps in the problematic cases you can use 2NT and in the easy cases use a suit.

[Mbodell]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-December-21, 10:04, said:

You can use 2♥ or 2♠, we use 2♥.

We use 3♣ over 2♦ rebid as art. gf with the majors as natural and NF. It works ok, but it is definitely more comfortable when opener has ♣ instead of ♦.

[Antrax]

We play 2/1, so the problem auctions seem to be 1x-1♠-2x, where a new suit by responder could still be natural.

[P_Marlowe]

2S.

In the seq.

1X - 1S
2X - ???

we use 2X+1 as artificial, but partner is allowed to raise
the art. suit to show 4 card support, if he happens to have
max.

If you want to play 2H in the seq.

1D - 1S
2D - 2H

as natural, use 3C as the art. bid.

This wont cover all your bases, but will work most of the time.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[aguahombre]

Antrax, on 2011-December-22, 00:58, said:

We play 2/1, so the problem auctions seem to be 1x-1♠-2x, where a new suit by responder could still be natural.

Pray tell what 2/1 has to do with 1/1? Not even the negative inferences of choosing a shorter major to respond because we have less than G.F. values is restricted to 2/1 styles.

[Antrax]

If you read Cascade's post on top of the page, you will see a list of potentially problematic auctions. Playing 2/1 GF renders some of the problematic sequences less problematic, since we're already in a game forcing auction, and there are well defined continuations for finding stoppers for 3NT etc.

[aguahombre]

Antrax, on 2011-December-22, 04:55, said:

If you read Cascade's post on top of the page, you will see a list of potentially problematic auctions. Playing 2/1 GF renders some of the problematic sequences less problematic, since we're already in a game forcing auction, and there are well defined continuations for finding stoppers for 3NT etc.

The only thing vaguely relevant to 2/1 is Cascade's aside that they also play 2NT as an artificial call after a 2/1 response. Fred, and others on separate sites, have explained with great care that 2/1 style refers to auctions which start with a 2/1 response.

[Antrax]

I'm confused. Cascade mentioned 1♠-2♣-2♠ might be a problematic auction for the same reason 1♣-1♥-2♣ is, without special agreements. I mentioned that because we play 2/1, auctions like 1♠-2♣-2♠ are not problematic for a game-forcing hand from responder's side. What is the point of contention?

[P_Marlowe]

Antrax, on 2011-December-22, 05:06, said:

I'm confused. Cascade mentioned 1♠-2♣-2♠ might be a problematic auction for the same reason 1♣-1♥-2♣ is, without special agreements. I mentioned that because we play 2/1, auctions like 1♠-2♣-2♠ are not problematic for a game-forcing hand from responder's side. What is the point of contention?

I am not sure, but the problem in the seq.

1S - 2C
2S - ...

is not the main topic of this thread, the main topic of this thread is
seq., where conventiones like 3rd suit forcing / NWF or Bourke Relay
can help.

The seq.

1S - 2C
2S - ...

has its own issue, e.g. is 2S always a 6 card suit, and so on

And a final comment - Cascade does not play 2/1, so his problems with
a special seq. may not be yours.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

Antrax, on 2011-December-22, 05:06, said:

I'm confused. Cascade mentioned 1♠-2♣-2♠ might be a problematic auction for the same reason 1♣-1♥-2♣ is, without special agreements. I mentioned that because we play 2/1, auctions like 1♠-2♣-2♠ are not problematic for a game-forcing hand from responder's side. What is the point of contention?

I am not sure, but the problem in the seq.

1S - 2C
2S - ...

is not the main topic of this thread, the main topic of this thread is
seq., where conventiones like 3rd suit forcing / NWF or Bourke Relay
can help.

The seq.

1S - 2C
2S - ...

has its own issue, e.g. is 2S always a 6 card suit, and so on

And a final comment - Cascade does not play 2/1, so his problems with
a special seq. may not be yours.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[ArtK78]

Quite some time ago, there was a Bridge World article on Extended New Minor Forcing, which was referred to in the title as "Extended PLOB." PLOB is an acronym for "Petty Little Odious Bid," which was what Sonny Moyse called New Minor Forcing.

In Extended New Minor Forcing, the auction 1♣ - 1M - 2♣ - 2♦ is NMF. Similarly, on the auction 1♦ - 1M - 2♦ - 3♣ is NMF.

As was mentioned above, the auction 1♣ - 1♠ - 2♣ - 2♥ is nonforcing if you play Extended New Minor Forcing. However, it does not promise 5-5.

On the hand in the OP, this is an easy 2♦ call playing Extended New Minor Forcing. The subsequent 3♣ bid would be game forcing.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

The basic problem with "NMF" over Opener's minor rebid is when the minor is ♦.
3♣! as the artificial force takes up too much valuable space -- it's just not an efficient force.
1♦ - 1♠
2♦ - 2♥! ( cheapest new suit forcing )
??
..Opener now has 2♠/2NT/or 3♣ available that he would not have if 3♣! were the artificial force.

Likewise:
1♦ - 1♥
2♦ - 2♠!
??
..2NT and 3♣ are still available as rebids.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
EDIT ( Addition ).
I'm interested too in cyberyeti's post # 12 where he suggests to use 2♥! as the artificial force for the last sequence:
1♦ - 1♥
2♦ - 2♥!
??
.. Now 2♠/2NT/and 3♣ are available

[ArtK78]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2011-December-22, 09:04, said:

The basic problem with "NMF" over Opener's minor rebid is when the minor is ♦.
3♣! as the artificial force takes up too much valuable space -- it's just not an efficient force.
1♦ - 1♠
2♦ - 2♥! ( cheapest new suit forcing )
??
..Opener now has 2♠/2NT/or 3♣ available that he would not have if 3♣! were the artificial force.

Likewise:
1♦ - 1♥
2♦ - 2♠!
??
..2NT and 3♣ are still available as rebids.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
EDIT ( Addition ).
I'm interested too in cyberyeti's post # 12 where he suggests to use 2♥! as the artificial force for the last sequence:
1♦ - 1♥
2♦ - 2♥!
??
.. Now 2♠/2NT/and 3♣ are available

The decision to use either 2♥ or 2♠ as the artificial forcing call (as opposed to 3♣) on the auction 1♦ - 1M - 2♦ rests on how valuable you determine the alternate use of that call - natural and nonforcing - is.

In my opinion, having used 3♣ as the artificial game force for many years, I find that the natural and nonforcing use of 2 of a major (and, for that matter, 2NT) is valuable, and that the extra space used by the 3♣ call when used as the artificial game forcing call is a fair exchange for keeping the natural and nonforcing meanings of the 2 level calls.

[Zelandakh]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-December-21, 10:02, said:

No, what I was suggesting is something that gets "invented" in various acol auctions where you jump in a minor suit just to force and it comes with no guarantees.

An example, you hold something like Q65432, AKx, AK, Kx, playing with somebody who plays much older style Acol than you're used to.

Partner opens 1♣, you don't fancy 2♠ because of the suit quality so bid 1♠, partner bids 2♣, now what. The answer apparently is that you bid 3♦. I bid 3♠ and that wasn't as forcing as I'd hoped

This is one possible answer. Lots of other Acolites play a new suit here as forcing without having any specific agreements for artificial relays. For a decent online write-up of this little gadget I will once again give this link.