[Al_U_Card]

luis, on Aug 1 2005, 12:51 PM, said:

I play that 2♠ is forcing but doesn't promise a rebid.
Responder can pass if:
Opener rebids his suit
Opener supports with 3♠ or 4♠
Opener bids 2NT or 3NT

Responder can't pass to a new suit or a cuebid.

Likewise, but I would still double with this hand.

[Elianna]

I held xxx AQ Axx KTxxx. I made the correct decision (on the lay of the cards) to bid 2NT, but managed to completely misplay it (I HATE 10am start times, especially on the East coast, where I'm forced to play at least an hour before I would normally be awake).

Anyway, Mike Pudlin (a well respected LA player, who was the 2♥ bidder on xx KJxxxxx Kxx Q) thought that partner's 2♠ bid was the only possible bid on her hands. I disagreed vehemently (picturing a stronger spade suit, even making one of her A's a spade A would be more acceptable to me). Mike polled a group of people, as did I.

According to him, everyone that he asked voted for 2♠. Everyone I asked voted for dble.

I had lunch the next day with Mike, John Jones (another LA expert) and Marshall Miles (recently inducted into the hall of fame) and Mike asked Marshall's opinion, which was in favor of bidding 2♠ (as that's what he did at the table). I later ran into Gene Freed (Grand LM from LA, and still active expert player), and he said that he'd double. I told him Marshall voted for 2♠. His response: all the more reason to double.

Oh, yea, this was matchpoints, but I don't remember vulnerability.

[flytoox]

I will bid 2S. This is a tough choice. As many said, good control and JT9 of spade give me reason to be aggressive.


But more important is partnership should be more understanding when confront this kind situation. Dbl, 2S or pass could all be right. To argue who is right or wrong is not very productive. Instead, make an agreement what you and pd should bid when similar hand comes up next time.

[flytoox]

Double !, on Jul 29 2005, 06:52 PM, said:

This post raises an issue for me.

Assuming that the partnership is NOT playing negative free bids, does the person making the 2S bid unconditionally promise another bid? This is an issue where I have heard differing opinions such as "yes, unless opener rebids 2NT". For those of you not playing nfb's (are there any?), what are your opinions on this question. (This is sort of like the question of, playing sayc, whether or not someone making a 2/1 response promises a second bid.)
Thanks in advance.
DHL

I strongly recommend you to get a copy of Mike Lawrence's complete guide to contested auctions. This book will answer many questions you have or will have.

[han]

Assuming that 2S is forcing I'd double. Seems clearcut to me.

[FrancesHinden]

mike777, on Jul 29 2005, 03:05 PM, said:

To repeat playing NFB after WJO must surely be convention abuse!

I play in two regular partnerships. In one of them we play 2S as forcing, in the other we play it as non-forcing. Neither of them think playing NFB after a WJO is "convention abuse" or anything so silly.

The logic for NFB after a WJO is exactly the same as after a simple overcall: if you have long spades you want to show them. Doubling on a weak hand with spades doesn't really work as you'd have to bid them at the 3-level after partner's likely 2NT rebid, so you have to pass on, say, KQ10xxx xx xxx xx which feels a bit worrying.

The logic for playing 2S as forcing is exactly the same as after a simple overcall: it makes game forcing hands immensely simpler to bid.

There are many hands where you bid 2S whether it's forcing or not - there's a huge overlap between them.

If you play 2S as forcing, it seems pretty weird to me to say it promises a rebid. That makes it virtually game forcing, and puts far too much strain on the double.