[Vampyr]

Uncontested Auction:

1♣-1♠
2♣-2♥
2NT-3♠

2♥ is forcing because we don't play any kind of xy or xyz or anything like that. 2NT was, of course, NF. What about 3♠? Forcing or not?

[mike777]

Vampyr, on 2013-July-25, 10:53, said:

Uncontested Auction:

1♣-1♠
2♣-2♥
2NT-3♠

2♥ is forcing because we don't play any kind of xy or xyz or anything like that. 2NT was, of course, NF. What about 3♠? Forcing or not?

I don't play 2h as 100% forcing so I guess I would ask how forcing is 2h for you, if only forcing to 2nt then do you play any and all bids over 2nt as gf?

I play 2d over 2c as an art gf.
2h would be a good inv and any bid after pard rebid of 2nt would be 100% gf for me, in other words I can never play in 3s or 3h or 3c here once opener bids 2nt.

so 3s here is gf say:

Qxxxxx..AKQx...Qx...x

with less I would be forced to just pass 2nt.

[Vampyr]

mike777, on 2013-July-25, 11:11, said:

I don't play 2h as 100% forcing so I guess I would ask how forcing is 2h for you, if only forcing to 2nt then do you play any and all bids over 2nt as gf?

Very good question. 2♥ was 100% forcing, but only to 2NT. I hadn't thought about bids over 2NT, but if all bids over 2NT are GF, then I am wondering how responder bids shapely invitational hands.

EDIT: Come to think of it, 2♥ was forcing only to 2♠

[MrAce]

Vampyr, on 2013-July-25, 10:53, said:

Uncontested Auction:

1♣-1♠
2♣-2♥
2NT-3♠

2♥ is forcing because we don't play any kind of xy or xyz or anything like that. 2NT was, of course, NF. What about 3♠? Forcing or not?

xyz applies only when 3 suits are bid at 1 level.

I strongly suggest to play

1♣-1♠
2♣-2♦ (artificial-just like nmf or 4th sf ) and 2♥ natural NF.

This way you can play 2♥ when 4-4 ♥ was available or opener turns to 2♠ or makes some better bid if 2♣ range is wide (usually it is up to 16 hcp) but depends on style. And you can still find 4-4 ♥ bid when you bid 2♦ artificial, after 2 ♦ you can start a GF auction when you are about to rebid your spades or support pd in clubs, just like nmf, checkback or 4th suit forcing.

Just saying..

[Free]

For me 2NT shows extras (otherwise just rebid 2♠ or 3♣), so 3♠ is forcing.

[Vampyr]

Free, on 2013-July-25, 12:12, said:

For me 2NT shows extras (otherwise just rebid 2♠ or 3♣), so 3♠ is forcing.

It would be awkward in our methods for 2NT to show extras (In fact I had ♠A9 ♥xx ♦AQxx ♣ Kxxxx.)

[Free]

Vampyr, on 2013-July-25, 12:16, said:

It would be awkward in our methods for 2NT to show extras (In fact I had ♠A9 ♥xx ♦AQxx ♣ Kxxxx.)

That's a nice 2♠ rebid for me

[Vampyr]

Free, on 2013-July-25, 12:20, said:

That's a nice 2♠ rebid for me

Right, well, it is clear that our methods need refinement.

[aguahombre]

Vampyr, on 2013-July-25, 11:19, said:

I hadn't thought about bids over 2NT, but if all bids over 2NT are GF, then I am wondering how responder bids shapely invitational hands.

Sometimes, IMO, we have to just accept that our 3-bids over 2NT will commit us to game. As for the Invites with long decent spades, 3S rather than 2H will get it done. The invites with 5-5 in the majors just decide to be g.f. or not.

Am willing to give up on Mike's example Queen empty 6th spade suit after 2NT. 3S would be forcing, could be slammish after:

1m-1S
2m-2H
2NT.

[aguahombre]

Vampyr, on 2013-July-25, 12:16, said:

It would be awkward in our methods for 2NT to show extras (In fact I had ♠A9 ♥xx ♦AQxx ♣ Kxxxx.)

Would not occur. Would rebid 1NT or prepare with 1D opening (distant second choice). The 2C rebid is off our chart.

[ArtK78]

If you don't play extended NMF here (2♦ would have been strong, forcing and artificial) or any other conventional force, you may have to rely on an idea that I set forth in another thread yesterday.

When bidding 6-4 hands, with the 6 card suit being the higher ranking suit, there are two orders in which you can bid the suits to convey that you are 6-4:

A - B - A
A - A - B

It is my understanding that bidding the suits A - B - A is stronger than bidding the suits A - A - B. The reason would be that you cannot give a preference to B without increasing the level of the auction.

Assuming that A - A - B is at least game invitational, that would imply that A - B - A would be game forcing. Therefore, the 3♠ bid in the sequence that you set out would be forcing.

[Vampyr]

aguahombre, on 2013-July-25, 13:14, said:

Would not occur. Would rebid 1NT or prepare with 1D opening (distant second choice). The 2C rebid is off our chart.

Playing weak NT and 2♣ is normal in our methods, although clearly not wonderful on this hand.

[Vampyr]

ArtK78, on 2013-July-25, 13:25, said:

When bidding 6-4 hands, with the 6 card suit being the higher ranking suit, there are two orders in which you can bid the suits to convey that you are 6-4:

Would you apply this to 6-5 hands, or would you bid A-B-B and treat that as forcing?

[mike777]

Vampyr, on 2013-July-25, 12:16, said:

It would be awkward in our methods for 2NT to show extras (In fact I had ♠A9 ♥xx ♦AQxx ♣ Kxxxx.)

strongly prefer to rebid 1nt.

now you can have an xyz auction

edit if you play wk nt this looks like a wk nt opener?

[jeffford76]

aguahombre, on 2013-July-25, 13:11, said:

The invites with 5-5 in the majors just decide to be g.f. or not.

I don't think so. 1m - 1S - 2m - 3H works well for these.

[helene_t]

yes I think 3♠ is forcing. what else can I do with a gf 6-4.

[aguahombre]

ArtK78, on 2013-July-25, 13:25, said:

If you don't play extended NMF here (2♦ would have been strong, forcing and artificial) or any other conventional force, you may have to rely on an idea that I set forth in another thread yesterday.

When bidding 6-4 hands, with the 6 card suit being the higher ranking suit, there are two orders in which you can bid the suits to convey that you are 6-4:

A - B - A
A - A - B

It is my understanding that bidding the suits A - B - A is stronger than bidding the suits A - A - B. The reason would be that you cannot give a preference to B without increasing the level of the auction.

Assuming that A - A - B is at least game invitational, that would imply that A - B - A would be game forcing. Therefore, the 3♠ bid in the sequence that you set out would be forcing.

The problem there is that A-A-B is not quaranteed to get us past a Pass of the 2nd "A"

I doubt many people agree that:

1C-1S
2C-2S is forcing rather than the end of the auction 99 percent of the time.

[Vampyr]

mike777, on 2013-July-25, 13:39, said:

edit if you play wk nt this looks like a wk nt opener?

It doesn't to me, really. I almost never open 1NT with 5-4-2-2, especially with 2-2 in the majors. If I were going to do it, it would only be if I had an honour in both doubletons.

[aguahombre]

Vampyr, on 2013-July-25, 14:11, said:

It doesn't to me, really. I almost never open 1NT with 5-4-2-2, especially with 2-2 in the majors. If I were going to do it, it would only be if I had an honour in both doubletons.

Yeh, well with a weak NT you have the same prepared opening issue. Opening 1C, then rebidding 2C, would still be off our chart; and the prepared 1NT opening seems better than the sort-of prepared 1D opening which would force a 2C rebid even if Pard responded 1H (because we don't have the strength to rebid 1NT).

[ArtK78]

aguahombre, on 2013-July-25, 14:11, said:

The problem there is that A-A-B is not quaranteed to get us past a Pass of the 2nd "A"

I doubt many people agree that:

1C-1S
2C-2S is forcing rather than the end of the auction 99 percent of the time.

That is the point. It is the weaker sequence.