A turn for the worse...

[Winstonm]

I think 2S is clearly forcing, and I think I would have passed.

 

I would not pass 1D-1H-1S or 1D-1H-2S.

If 2S is clearly forcing, how can you pass? It must only be 99% forcing? Maybe a better way to put it is 2S is intended as forcing but may be passed under extreme conditions. But if you pass, Justin passed, and I pass, I don't think the bid can be considered 100% forcing - I've never passed a forcing 2C opener in my life - now that's a forcing bid. Maybe I'm arguing semantics here, but to me if a bid is forcing then pass is not an option, no matter what you hold.

 

Many play 1D-1H-1S as non-forcing, and whether it is better to pass 1S than try to improve the contract is debatable. Being in the frying pan at the 1-level somehow appeals to me more than being in the fire at the 3-level.

 

However, 1D-1H-2S is 100% forcing and cannot be passed.

[Guest Jlall]

Maybe I'm arguing semantics here,

Yes I think so.

 

However, 1D-1H-2S is 100% forcing and cannot be passed.

 

You've never passed a jumpshift before? I don't see how under your definitions this can be 100 % forcing, partner is limited by his failure to open 2C.

 

Forcing means partner expects you to not pass. Forcing bids can be made with game in their own hands, including 2S on the given auction. Passing 2S in the given auction is no different than passing a jumpshift, they have the same upper limit.

 

Either a bid is forcing or it isn't, I don't think a bid can be defined as 90 % forcing, but again we're getting back to semantics.

[jdonn]

I think 2S is clearly forcing, and I think I would have passed.

 

I would not pass 1D-1H-1S or 1D-1H-2S.

If 2S is clearly forcing, how can you pass? It must only be 99% forcing? Maybe a better way to put it is 2S is intended as forcing but may be passed under extreme conditions. But if you pass, Justin passed, and I pass, I don't think the bid can be considered 100% forcing - I've never passed a forcing 2C opener in my life - now that's a forcing bid. Maybe I'm arguing semantics here, but to me if a bid is forcing then pass is not an option, no matter what you hold.

It's not really semantics, we all know what the word 'forcing' means. You are simply interpreting the word as a rule imposed on responder, whereas you would be better served in this case considering it as an expectation placed on responder.

 

I think the main reason this hand is a good candidate for passing a forcing bid is the combination of a total misfit, and of something happening in the auction to make your hand not worth its previous bidding. The 2♥ bid decreases the value of the heart king to the point that the hand is no longer worth the original response, which is what makes pass viable to me.

 

I frankly think I would have bid 2NT at the table, but like pass better upon hearing about it.

 

Also, a 2♣ opening bid is completely artificial (whereas this 2♠ a forcing NATURAL bid) and completely unlimited (unlike this hand limited by the failure to open 2♣ in the first place). Hardly a fair comparison.

[Winstonm]

Maybe I'm arguing semantics here,

Yes I think so.

 

However, 1D-1H-2S is 100% forcing and cannot be passed.

 

You've never passed a jumpshift before? I don't see how under your definitions this can be 100 % forcing, partner is limited by his failure to open 2C.

 

Forcing means partner expects you to not pass. Forcing bids can be made with game in their own hands, including 2S on the given auction. Passing 2S in the given auction is no different than passing a jumpshift, they have the same upper limit.

 

Either a bid is forcing or it isn't, I don't think a bid can be defined as 90 % forcing, but again we're getting back to semantics.

My whole point in this discussion is that if you want to make a guaranteed, 100% never to be passed forcing bid then why not use double, jump shift with distributional hands, or cue bids?

 

If you consider the hand types, there are the 19-22 5431 and 4441 patterns that could use double; there are the strong 2-suiters that are 5/6 that could jump shift; and strong; I don't know what would use a cue bid.

 

The point being that if you use double as a more meaningful bid than penalty, which would be rare in this sequence, then you allow a free bid to be less than that and if it is less than game force it should not be forcing, but invitational.

 

To my thinking on this sequence, I'd like to be able to bid 2S on a hand such as:

AKxx, x, AQJxx, Qxx and have my partner be able to pass with xxxx, Kxxx, xx, Kxx.

 

So in essence my argument has not been so much about the forcing nature of 2S but of the poor choice (IMO) of using double as penalty - when double is freed for a better usage, 2S is not needed as a forcing bid.

[Fluffy]

You've never passed a jumpshift before? I don't see how under your definitions this can be 100 % forcing, partner is limited by his failure to open 2C.

I ain't winstom, but I ahven't ever passed a jump shift without opposition, and 2 suiters don't open 2C below 25 HCP :P.