Poll 1 of 2

[1eyedjack]

Definition of opener's rebid in a natural system, uncontested auction:

1♦1♥

2♠

 

It is really a BIL question but I wanted to limit the poll responses to those who speak with authority.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I think that people from europe will

answer forcing (for one round) but not

game forcing, and peoplw from North

America will answer game forcing or at

least promising a rebid.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[helene_t]

Huh? I'm a European an I've never heard someone advocating that this is not GF.

[1eyedjack]

Huh? I'm a European an I've never heard someone advocating that this is not GF.

Also European. I have played it variously as both GF and F1. I really do not know which is standard. I tend to play 2N rebid after a 2 level reverse as Lebensohl, regardless. Perhaps more necessary in the F1 scenario, but still having some benefits to split ranges for slam investigation in the GF scenario. But that is a separate question perhaps more relevant to poll 2, where the question of 4th suit rebid by responder is considered.

[P_Marlowe]

Huh? I'm a European an I've never heard someone advocating that this is not GF.

ok, I learned to play Bridge in Ireland,

and at least stone age Acol plays a reverse

just as a 1 round force,

i.e. a reverse does not even promise a rebid,

reverses promising a rebid is yet another style.

 

My impression was, that Acol style is fairly common

through europe, most bids are a tad lighter than

similar bids in North America.

But maybe the impression was wrong.

 

The mayor question is, how ligh can a reverse be.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[helene_t]

Very few play a reverse as GF. But this situation is different. Opener could show his shape with a 1♠ rebid if he had less than GF values.

[paulg]

A jump rebid in a third suit is forcing to game - Precision Bidding in Acol, Eric Crowhurst

 

I must admit that I was surprised when I looked this up, but standards have dropped in all aspects of the game since Eric wrote the book. Many of us respond and jump rebid with less and play Lebensohl-style gadgets to stay out of game.

 

p

[Trinidad]

There is a difference between a reverse and a jump shift.

 

Reverses are showing extra's but are only forcing for one round. In this case opener has to show his second suit in a non economical way. If he wants to show his second suit he can't do anything else but raise the level of the auction.

 

Jump shifts are GF. Opener can show his second suit economically but chooses voluntarily to raise the level of the bidding. He must have a reason, other than just some extra's. Therefore, jump shifts are GF.

 

This is even stronger for the given auction (1♦-1♥; 2♠) since the non jump shift auction (1♦-1♥; 1♠) will rarely be passed. Contrast this with e.g. 1♥-1♠; 3♣ where some people (not me) would make a case that it is not GF because 1♥-1♠; 2♣ will be passed quite often.

 

Rik

[SoTired]

1D 1H 2S, right? This is not a reverse, this is a jump-shift. Opener's jump-shift have always been game-force.

[Guest Jlall]

jump shift, GFing.

[hatchett]

GF natural is standard

[jillybean]

Absolutely GF - it is a jump shift not a reverse

 

(see my many other questions on this :)

[pclayton]

jump shift, GFing.

Er, but you'd sometimes pass right, since 1♥ can be: xxx, Qxxxx, x, xxxx? :)

 

GFing for me, and I never pass a JS.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

sry, I overlooked the fact that it was

a jump shift, a jump shift is game forcing,

5-4.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[inquiry]

Standard for 2♠ is GF if you are playing 2/1 GF, or SAYC. Playing precsion or similar systems where the 1♦ bidder is limited is open for discussion on rather or not 2♠ is even FORCING, much less game forcing.

 

I prefer to use a lot of gadget that both limit the stregnth of my 1♦ opening bid and the legnth of my 2♠ jump (I can't have five spades for instance due to an unusual treatment I play). So I prefer to play 2♠ as just FORCING (not game forcing). Responder can bid 2NT with terrible hands, and I will use paradox responses, bidding 3♣ only if I am willing to hear partner pass 3♣, bidding 3♦ only if I am willing to pass out 3♦ but not 3♣, etc. BTW, my 2♠ will NEVER include four card support for partners heart suit.

[neilkaz]

I play normal 2/1 or SAYC if PD doesn't play 2/1. Opener's jump shifts are 100% GF which is just the way I like it.

[SoTired]

Er, but you'd sometimes pass right, since 1♥ can be: xxx, Qxxxx, x, xxxx? :P

Which brings up another question. As responder, I pass with the above because I know Murphy.

 

Do any experts playing SA or 2/1 respond with that hand?

[dake50]

In all auctions, F1 or GF, there must be 'I want out' responses that intend to remove GF, any other accepts GF. So even F1 is GF except after a few(one) rebid.

[Guest Jlall]

Er, but you'd sometimes pass right, since 1♥ can be: xxx, Qxxxx, x, xxxx? B)

 

GFing for me, and I never pass a JS.

Of course. I would find it hard to believe that had I responded passing wouldn't be percentage in context of partner not having a 2C opener. I also believe that responding is definitely percentage. So there you go. I believe that forcing bids can sometimes be passed if its deemed to be the percentage action, that doesn't mean they aren't defined by forcing, and I pass them maybe .1 % of the time.

[Guest Jlall]

Which brings up another question. As responder, I pass with the above because I know Murphy.

Wouldn't you rather be playing 2S than 1D on these cards? You have usually improved the contract so what's the problem? Meanwhile you might have stolen from them had partner not had a jumpshift, you may have found a making 4H contract, etc etc. If you deem playing 2S as worst case scenario for responding then I couldn't imagine not responding.

[awm]

There is a mild disclosure issue here, perhaps. If a 2♠ rebid in this auction is deemed not forcing that probably should be alertable given the poll results and the definitions of standard systems. Of course we can say "sometimes I tactically pass forcing bids and that doesn't make them not forcing" but Justin's indicated in other threads that he routinely responds with 0-3 hcp on a number of hand patterns, and that he would consistently pass the jump shift with many such hands... so doesn't that make the 2♠ rebid non-forcing?

[Guest Jlall]

There is a mild disclosure issue here, perhaps. If a 2♠ rebid in this auction is deemed not forcing that probably should be alertable given the poll results and the definitions of standard systems. Of course we can say "sometimes I tactically pass forcing bids and that doesn't make them not forcing" but Justin's indicated in other threads that he routinely responds with 0-3 hcp on a number of hand patterns, and that he would consistently pass the jump shift with many such hands... so doesn't that make the 2♠ rebid non-forcing?

...

 

As far as I know bids are not defined by forcing or NFing, they are defined by what they mean. Whether they're forcing or NFing is defined by what they mean. 2S to me means the same thing as it means to everyone else. It is not a different bid. I would expect partner to open 1D and bid 2S with AKQxx x AKxxxx x. I would expect partner to open 1D and rebid 2S with AKx KQx AKxxxx x. This is just bridge. Are you really arguing that a bid that means the same thing as all other standard players should be alerted? Come on. It is bridge that some forcing bids can be passed. It is bridge that some sign offs can be raised. These are not alerts, they are bridge. If a bid has a strange meaning it should be alerted. That is not the case here.

 

As far as frequency, if 1 % of my responses after this auction have been made on the "0-3" variety, and I pass the jumpshift on 15 % of those, how often is this even relevant?

 

And what will give you a better idea of what I have if I DO pass 2S? If I alert it as non forcing and then pass? Or if I say it is forcing and pass. I imagine that the first would be VERY misleading, and in the second case you will know exactly what is happening.

[jdeegan]

:P The theory here is based on the principle of economy. The jump shift uses up a level of bidding, but for the purpose of creating bidding space for further investigation. Almost always, a third suit J/S indicates that the eventual strain is in doubt so finding it becomes the first priority.