BBO Discussion Forums: "Forcing Game" - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

"Forcing Game" Fred's comment

#1 User is offline   mike777 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 16,739
  • Joined: 2003-October-07
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2005-February-02, 17:41

Assume you are long in trump. Example you have 5 trumps and opp are at 2 level.

In another thread Fred commented that in low level contracts the "forcing game or forcing defense" is often not the best plan since declarer ruffs with low trumps.

1) Comments?
2) At what level is it more effective, 3 or 4?
3) Other factors to consider?
0

#2 User is offline   luke warm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,951
  • Joined: 2003-September-07
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Bridge, poker, politics

Posted 2005-February-02, 17:50

i think a lot of it depends on the bidding (do opps have a fit? is dummy more likely to be short in the forcing suit?)

in the other thread, i believe it was lho who bid spades, that's why i led the stiff... in general, i personally like forcing declarer when i have as many, or more, trumps as he has
"Paul Krugman is a stupid person's idea of what a smart person sounds like." Newt Gingrich (paraphrased)
0

#3 User is offline   Fluffy 

  • World International Master without a clue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,404
  • Joined: 2003-November-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:madrid

Posted 2005-February-03, 02:55

You have to force declarer when he has a 2 suiter, so he cannot make the tricks on the secondary suit, when he has balanced or 1 suiter forcing has no sense.
0

#4 User is offline   mike777 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 16,739
  • Joined: 2003-October-07
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2005-February-03, 11:02

In Fred's comments opener did have a two suiter and he suggested not to play forcing game versus low level contracts due to ruffs with low trumps.
0

#5 User is offline   fred 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,597
  • Joined: 2003-February-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, USA

Posted 2005-February-03, 11:10

mike777, on Feb 3 2005, 05:02 PM, said:

In Fred's comments opener did have a two suiter and he suggested not to play forcing game versus low level contracts due to ruffs with low trumps.

There are few places in bridge whre "always" and "never" type statements apply, but in my experience "forcing game" type defenses tend to be more effective against high level contracts.

Still, there are a lot of factors to consider (your trump holding, the bidding, your holding in declarer's side suit, what the dummy rates to look like, how many entries you have...).

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com
0

#6 User is offline   tysen2k 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 406
  • Joined: 2004-March-25

Posted 2005-February-03, 11:19

fred, on Feb 3 2005, 12:10 PM, said:

There are few places in bridge whre "always" and "never" type statements apply, but in my experience "forcing game" type defenses tend to be more effective against high level contracts.

When I was teaching a group of brand new students, I put a bunch of bridge "rules" up on the board. The first rule was:

1. Every bridge rule has its exception - including this one

Tysen :P
A bit of blatant self-pimping - I've got a new poker book that's getting good reviews.
0

#7 User is offline   Fluffy 

  • World International Master without a clue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,404
  • Joined: 2003-November-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:madrid

Posted 2005-February-03, 18:09

5431 and 5422 belong ot the semi balanced more than to the 2 suiter actually
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users