Is this forcing?

[flytoox]

Pd and I have different opinion on this sequence. What is your opinion?

 

None al. Sitting south you hold

S: JT

H: 2

D: 56789

C: AQJXX

 

W N E S

-- -- -- P

1H P P 2N

P 3H P 4C

P 4D P ?

 

2N shows minors. 3H shows game interest. 4C denied heart control. Is 4D forcing? Or is it just a preference?

 

Your opinion and reasoning are more than welcome.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Hongjun

[helene_t]

If 3♥ only "showed game interest" 4♦ cannot be forcing. How else could you stop below game?

 

You could agree to play 3♥ as GF, of course. But I don't think that's practical, especially here where South is a passed hand and North failed to take action over the 1♥ opening.

[Finch]

If 3♥ only "showed game interest" 4♦ cannot be forcing. How else could you stop below game?

Quite.

[keylime]

Nonforcing. If pard wanted game he/she makes another noise, 4♠, 4Nt, something.

[kenberg]

I agree with the responses so far and let me add another point. This is one of those auctions that you won't often have. In such cases, simplicity must rule. If N hopes to be in game after 2NT, he can bid 3H as he did looking for 3NT (or possibly even 4S if S is 3-0-5-5, and then, not finding it, he should bid the game in the minor of his choice. With the auction chosen it is perfectly reasonable for S to figure him for some spade length (someone has to have spades), enough values so that he expects/hopes to bring in 3NT if hearts are stopped, and a desire to sign off in 4D if nothing seems to be working.

 

A pair that has all of its other ducks lined up in a row could work out in advance whatever meaning they think appropriate here, I guess, but most of us need to work out these rare auctions on the fly using bridge logic. Here it is perfectly reasonable for N to want to get out in 4D so if he has the rather unusual hand where over 4C he now wants to play 5D he should just bid it rather than confusing S. Sure this gives up on a scientific exploration of slam, but that is an extremely unlikely possibility. Not impossible I suppose, but certainly not likely and not worth risking a misunderstood 4D.

 

 

I believe this sort of reasoning should apply to other undiscussed and possibly ambiguous auctions. Forget the science that will confuse partner. If you want to be in game, bid game. Partner will appreciate it.

[Guest Jlall]

People actually play 2N in balancing seat as minors?

 

Anyways...I would go with not forcing.

[helene_t]

People actually play 2N in balancing seat as minors?

Only by a passed hand, I suppose.

[whereagles]

It makes more sense as forcing... until you ask yourself what kind of hand can pard have that suddently wants to play a slam after having passed 1♥.

 

Anyway, this isn't a situation of opinions. It's a matter of agreement. Without agreements, any opinion is as good as another.

[flytoox]

A related question, should 3H be played as GF or game interest only?

[helene_t]

A related question, should 3H be played as GF or game interest only?

As Kenberg said, simplicity should prevail. So if your general finosophy is that you can stop in 4m after a game try above 3m has been made, I think it should be invitational+. If you generally play a major suit after 3m (minor suit agreement) as GF, then this should be GF.

[whereagles]

If we go with the motto "no slam after opps opened 1x", then it makes more sense as game interest.

[Guest Jlall]

Ah a PH. It all makes sense. Then 4D is definitely not forcing...you are both passed hands..

[Finch]

If we go with the motto "no slam after opps opened 1x", then it makes more sense as game interest.

Why should we go with that motto?

I'd agree that it's rare to have a grand on after the opponents have opened, but small slams are not uncommon.

 

I don't mind going with "no slam after we've both passed once" but even that's not foolproof.

[mikeh]

Given that we are told, in the original post, that the cue was 'game interest', then the non-forcing interpretation of 4♦ makes sense. However, I tend to doubt that a partnership that did not know whether 4♦ was then forcing actually had the specific agreement: else one meaning flows from the other.

 

So I suspect that the real question that is raised by the post is whether the 3♥ bid established a force, such that 4♦ was non-passable.

 

No-one has yet come up with a meaning for the 3♥ bid, other than the suggestion that South might be able to bid 3♠ with 3=0=5=5. While true, that cannot be why North bid 3♥: if he had a hand that was interested in ♠s, he would not have passed 1♥. I reject the idea that North is asking for a ♥ stopper.

 

So North has a hand that has grown up remarkably: maybe a 3=5=4=1 or such.

 

And no-one has yet asked what N's alternatives were, should he want to invite game in ♦s. Surely we do not need both the cue followed by 4♦ and a direct 4♦ as invitational: it is not as if the cue first affords more information than the immediate jump. Furthermore, as Frances noted, there is no reason why N-S should allow W's opening bid to bar them from reaching a slam.

 

To me, the 3♥ cue seems likely to have been meant as establishing a force: indeed, I fail to see the logic in any other meaning, given that 4♦ was presumably available as an invitational bid.

 

Thus, had the post NOT included the (mis?)description of 3♥ game interest, I would vote 'forcing' for 4♦.

[Guest Jlall]

indeed, I fail to see the logic in any other meaning, given that 4♦ was presumably available as an invitational bid.

4D precludes 3S and 3N from pard. I don't even think 3S over 3H shows 3055, just some spade value. Partner may have been interested in 3N opposite either a 3S or 3N bid from partner (partner has long hearts, but he may have something like KQT A9xxx where if partner DOES bid 3N he will pass. Or he may have something like ATx AQ9xx in the majors where if partner bids 3S he can bid 3N).

 

That is my logic anyways.

[bid_em_up]

Well, I'm going to bid 5♦.

 

North is NOT a passed hand as some have suggested, imo. It would appear that he has a good hand that was about to convert to penalty a reopening X of 1H, and has a good fit in diamonds. How else is he supposed to show this and, at the same time, be able to make any attempt to investigate 6♦?

 

A 3D bid is non-forcing, I think most would agree that a 4D bid is invitational, and 5D is to play. Now, how else is North supposed to show a really good hand with a fit for at least one minor other than by cuebidding 3H? If 4D is invitational, why didnt partner bid it if he wanted our input as to whether or not we should bid game? He didnt want our input regarding bidding game. I think that by cuebidding 3H and then showing diamond support, partner has already created a game forcing sequence, at the very least, and I would consider it to be a general slam try as well.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I doubt that there exists a North hand, which

would want 4D to be forcing,

a hand not able to act over 1H, oppossite

a passed partner looking for slam?

 

I would bid 5D on the general principle,

that you dont want to play 4D.

 

If 3H, was just an invite, 4D cant be

forcing, but I dont think it really matters,

playing MP, I think pass maybe ok, but

playing IMP's I bid game.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[kenberg]

I understand bid em's argument that this should be a slam try. I also understand my own argument that N was attempting to reach a NT game and now wants to get out in 4D. Assuming there is no prior agreement (and who among us has prior discussions on this auction) I believe that if N wanted to play 5D he should have bid 5D. Science only works when partner is tuned in and this is a likely problem here.

 

I imagine we have all, at times, just bid game and later explained that we wanted to do something more exotic but decided to make a bid that would be clear. If I, as N, had the values for 5D I would just bid 5D. Partner can explain to me later how we should have reached slam, but at least we are in game.

 

PS Having thought a little more I agree with some others above that the 3H bid is not just asking for a heart stop (I just didn't think enough first). For one thing there are two suits to be stopped, and for another some heart values in the N hand makes sense. N could have a good hand, something like QJxx of hearts, no reasonable bid at the first round. But my view is still that we cannot do everything and sorting among 3N, 4m and 5m seems like work enough.

[cnszsun]

There is a general concept raised by this post.

In competition, usually you have no other way to show a game forcing minor raise except cuebid opponent's suit at 3-level. But this cuebid will be interpreted as probing for 3nt first, if your p rebid 3nt and you convert it to 4 minor, it's clear you are showing a slam try hand. But if your p does not rebid 3nt, for example 4C here, you bid 4D now, will it still show a slam try hand? I think so.

By playing this method, it avoids many ambiguity. You only lose the option to stop at 4 minor when 3nt is not available.

Of course, if you are already limited or can't have a slam hand, this will not apply.

 

If you play the opposite way, 4 minor after failing to bid 3nt is always a get-out, then you must jump to 5 minor to show a slam try hand. But with a hand, you only want to be in game, but want to try 3nt before 5 minor, how do you plan to show it?

 

I don't know which way is better, but i think most players don't want to play both ways, otherwise, you have to decide whether your p's 4 minor is forcing or not every time it comes up.

[bid_em_up]

There is a general concept raised by this post.

 

In competition, usually you have no other way to show a game forcing minor raise except cuebid opponent's suit at 3-level. But this cuebid will be interpreted as probing for 3nt first, if your p rebid 3nt and you convert it to 4 minor, it's clear you are showing a slam try hand. But if your p does not rebid 3nt, for example 4C here, you bid 4D now, will it still show a slam try hand? I think so.

 

By playing this method, it avoids many ambiguity. You only lose the option to stop at 4 minor when 3nt is not available.

Of course, if you are already limited or can't have a slam hand, this will not apply.

In the context of this auction, it is practically impossible for the 3H cuebid by North to be asking for a heart stop for 3N from south.

 

South is a passed hand, and at least 5-4, but could be 5-5, 6-5 or even 6-6 in the minors. How much sense can it make for North (who is already likely looking at one or two heart stops himself) to now be asking for a heart stop from south who rates to hold no more than a doubleton heart?!?

 

3H must create a game forcing auction. There is absolutely no other reason for the bid, imo. Partner has a big hand and a fit for at least one of the minors. If he wants to hear anything, he wants to hear a spade cuebid (either first or second round control) from south if south can make one.

[twcho]

This question is interesting enough and I've seek my pd's opinion on it. I am quite persuaded by his argument.

 

4D should be non forcing, reason as follows:

 

If 4D intends to be forcing, then it must be slam try. If one want to slam try with D fit, surely he must hold control for at least one major, then why can't he bid 4H or 4S instead of the ambiguous 4D. So 4D should be non forcing.