[Winstonm]

Quote

again, I would not take 3S as a forcing bid.

I really don't see the value of playing this as non-forcing. Even with a paltry:

KQxxx, xx, xxxx, xx

opposite a minimum reverse and a fit:

Jxx, AJ10x, Kx, AKJxx

I'll take my chances in 4S. IMO, passable hands are those similar to 2/1 rebid types - only passable when no fit is found.

WinstonM

[mike777]

4D

I can see 10 other reasonable bids.

With my luck p will have:

XXXXX
XX
AXXX
XX

[Double !]

mike777, on Jun 13 2005, 10:26 PM, said:

4D

I can see 10 other reasonable bids.

With my luck p will have:

XXXXX
XX
AXXX
XX

LOLOLOL

Then you are on a heart hook (if hearts are lead) and a 3-2 spade break to make 4S. And you'll have a plus score!

[mike777]

Double !, on Jun 13 2005, 10:44 PM, said:

mike777, on Jun 13 2005, 10:26 PM, said:

4D

I can see 10 other reasonable bids.

With my luck p will have:

XXXXX
XX
AXXX
XX

LOLOLOL

Then you are on a heart hook (if hearts are lead) and a 3-2 spade break to make 4S. And you'll have a plus score!

LOL I am tapped if D lead, the unbid suit

[the hog]

4D splinter. I don't mind Richard's 4C bid if it can be interpreted that way. Certainly 1C 1S 4C would show solid C and 4 card S support, so as a corollary 4C now could certainly show the given hand.

[P_Marlowe]

4S.

Hopefully we play 2NT in this seq. artificial,
in which case 2S says, p I know, you have a great
hand, but I am dead.

One may construct hands, 6S making, but I
have great doubts, that one can come up with
hands for responder, with which slam is better
than 50% most of the time.

One open question, I could not find the answer in
the system notes: Is the reverse in BBO Advanced
gameforcing?

With kind regards
Marlowe

[helene_t]

4♦, with a pick-up p I would certainly make this non-confusing bid.

I would like to have better spades and lesser clubs. Also, I would like to have a singleton instead of a void. But even if we play X-blackwood, 5♦ might take us too high.

[bearmum]

I went for 3♠ --- I have already shown a big hand by reversing BUT P has not done anything more than rebid his (presumably 5-6) ♠s

[bearmum]

Jlall, on Jun 14 2005, 02:29 PM, said:

Blofeld, on Jun 13 2005, 05:53 PM, said:

I went for a simple 3♠. 5♦ looks like it might work; I hadn't considered that.

Do the 4♣ bidders think that it shows a 3-4-0-6 shape precisely? I would have thought that it was just the cheapest force in clubs.

again, I would not take 3S as a forcing bid.

Is it necessary to make a 2nd forcing bid ( after the 2♥ reverse? )

[joker_gib]

2♠ by partner is weak (5-6 HCP) and he probably has some points lost in ♦.

I cannot see any hand to have a good slam so I will go for the practical 4♠ and hope it will make !

[Walddk]

You seem to forget that weak jump shifts are part of the system, so we can rule out quite a few hands partner can have. However, playing WJS doesn't mean that his 2♠ rebid shows a game invitational hand with a 6-card suit after a reverse. On the contrary!

If he has game invitational+ values, he should rebid 3♠ over 2♥. In other words: Responder is weak (2♠ is passable as I play it) with exactly 5 spades.

Consequently, slam is remote, if not non-existent. I have went through all the hands partner might have on this auction, and I found one where he might rebid 2♠ and where we might have a slam on.

A109xxx
K
xxxx
xx

This hand is perhaps too good for an initial jump to 2♠ and not good enough to invite game. 4♠ by opener is probably enough, but I don't mind 4♦ (splinter). If he, unlikely though, should have AKxxxx and out his next bid will surely be 6♠.

But I wouldn't be surprised if even 4♠ goes down.

Roland

[P_Marlowe]

Walddk, on Jun 14 2005, 03:47 AM, said:

You seem to forget that weak jump shifts are part of the system, so we can rule out quite a few hands partner can have. However, playing WJS doesn't mean that his 2♠ rebid shows a game invitational hand with a 6-card suit after a reverse. On the contrary!

Hi Roland,

thanks for the hint, I really did not think about that,
but than slam chances are approaching zero, if partner
holds exactly 5 spades in this seq, and 2S has to be
weak and non forcing.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[helene_t]

I think 2♠ is forcing in BBO-advanced. If responder has 5-7 HCPs with a 5-card spades, there is not much gained by passing 2♠ anyway:

Opener could have a 1435, in which case 2♠ isn't better than 2NT.
Or 2425 but in this case he must have extras or he would have opened 1NT.
Or a 6-card clubs in which case we can still sign off in 3♣.
Or 3-card spades support in which case 3♠ should be ok.

[han]

I assumed that 2S showed 5+ spades, is forcing but doesn't promise extra. I believe that the plurality of North American experts plays this. As BBO-standard seems to be based upon mainstream US methods, it should probably include this treatment. I think that the discussion is quite useless if we have no agreement about 2S.

I voted for 4S, but I like 4D (which I agree has to show a void) and 4C (If this really does show this hand) better.

[kgr]

Walddk, on Jun 14 2005, 10:47 AM, said:

You seem to forget that weak jump shifts are part of the system, so we can rule out quite a few hands partner can have. However, playing WJS doesn't mean that his 2♠ rebid shows a game invitational hand with a 6-card suit after a reverse. On the contrary!

If he has game invitational+ values, he should rebid 3♠ over 2♥. In other words: Responder is weak (2♠ is passable as I play it) with exactly 5 spades.

I didn't think about this.
I play WJS as weak (0-6 pts). Does the 2♠ bid in that case show extras or a 5-card (and with a 6 card he should always bid 3♠)?
What is the range of WJS in BBO advanced?

My choice was 4♦

[P_Marlowe]

helene_t, on Jun 14 2005, 04:44 AM, said:

I think 2♠ is forcing in BBO-advanced. If responder has 5-7 HCPs with a 5-card spades, there is not much gained by passing 2♠ anyway:

Opener could have a 1435, in which case 2♠ isn't better than 2NT.
Or 2425 but in this case he must have extras or he would have opened 1NT.
Or a 6-card clubs in which case we can still sign off in 3♣.
Or 3-card spades support in which case 3♠ should be ok.

Regarding 2S versus 2NT and the case opener holds a long
suit of its own:

Most of the time 2S will play better then 2NT or 3 of
openers suit , because most of the time the weak hand
will have only one asset: long trumps and no out
side entry.

Ths statement is made by a person, who does
not play WJS, but this statement still holds true,
when responder is limited to precisely 5 cards,
which needs not to be case, depending on style
regarding WJS.

Regarding 2425: Hopefully off shape NT openings
are not part of the system. I dont mind them, if the
right hands comes, but I sinisterly hope, that I am
not requiered to open every 2-4-2-5 hand with NT,
when holding 17 HCP.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[ochinko]

Obviously not popular and probably a bad decision, but I bid 3D. Usually you do that to find a stopper and stop in 3NT, but I would shift 3NT to 4Sp.

What would get me excited is if my partner denies a diamond stopper, meaning that we don't have wasted values there. Now I am going to explore a slam.

Petko

[inquiry]

As usual I will post the panel replies, one hand at a time. This time, however, I will also post all their votes in the original posting in table format, updating the table as I post their comments on each hand as I go along. Also as usual, I will wait a few days before posting all the panels votes so as not to stifle the discussion of the hands.

This hand, however, I have already posted a follow up poll about, in an effort to get a better feel for what the community thinks. I believe whole-heartedly that justin is correct that reverses ARE NOT GAME force. This has important implication because if 3S was now forcing, you could bid 3S to show shortness in diamonds (bid three suits natually, short in fourth). You can also jump to 4S or 4D to show the same, diamond shortness (theoretically I guess, you could be 2-4-2-5 with short diamonds and just too dang strong to stay out of game and bid 4S I guess).

So, to start off the unofficial panel response to this problem, let me say that none (so far) discussed the possibility of bidding 3S, nor mentioned rather they think that bid is forcing or not. However, my feeling from their responses is that 3♠ would NOT be forcing over 2♠... and right now, the even number responses in the Ingberman poll are way ahead (even number has 3♠ raise as non-forcing). So I think we will soon decide at least for the auction D (the 3S raise), that this is not forcing --- just as Justin states --- but time will tell, the poll is still open.

Ben