4SNGF

[1eyedjack]

Surely not a new idea, and probably thrashed around in these forums before now, but for some time now I have (with a regular partner) in one respect been bucking the popular trend regarding 4th suit forcing. I think it has some theoretical merit and so far I have not noticed any disasters.

 

It seems to me that the popular trend for 4th suit forcing is to make 4th suit game forcing (where not already in a GF auction). Well it would be GF anyway if at 3 level, but I am only considering here 4th suit forcing at the 2 level in an auction that hitherto is not GF.

 

I have been playing it completely the other way around for some time. Although there are some GF hand types that would still be contained in it, generally we would stretch to make a natural bid with a GF hand, and shove the invitational hands as far as possible into the 4th suit.

 

So, for example:

 

1H-1S

2C-3M

would be GF

 

1H-1S

2C-2D

??-3M

would be Invitational.

 

The main reason for our adopting this treatment was that you cannot control what partner will bid over the 4th suit (unless playing 4th suit puppet, which I don't particularly like for other reasons), so you cannot guarantee showing the GF hand type that you want to show at a convenient level if via 4th suit. Of course, neither is there such a guarantee if only invitational and having to go through 4th suit on those hands instead, but that loss doesn't seem to bother me so much.

 

I don't encounter other pairs playing it this way. Am I alone out there?

[P_Marlowe]

No your are not alone, I think Richard Pavlicek

sugest a similar structure.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Finch]

I don't play FSF as game forcing at the 2-level, but I also don't play your inverted structure. The obvious disadvantage is that opener will say something descriptive over the 4th suit bid, whereas in fact all you want is to allow responder to get his invite off his chest, and now the opponents know more about opener's hand. Against that, when you have a game forcing hand you are likely to be more interested in hearing opener's rebid, because you have some doubt over the final contract (or else you wouldn't have used fourth suit).

 

As an example, if you have a hand with game forcing values but uncertainty about strain - say AQxxx Kx xxx AQx - and the auction starts 1H - 1S - 2C - ? you want to bid 4th suit to find out whether to play in NT, spades, hearts, or clubs. Opener's rebid will help you here. But it sounds as if in your method you have to start with 4th suit (as you don't have an obvious natural call available) and then re-fourth suit on the next round to tell partner you have a game force. Make the hand slightly stronger - say AQ10xxx Kx xx AKx - and you want to look for a slam in a major, or the best game - if you bid 3S natural FG you have given up on hearts; if you bid fourth suit and partner bids 2S, you probably want to set spades as trumps, but now your 3S bid is invitational and you are in trouble.

 

You could play that FSF simply asks opener to bid step 1, after which responder clarifies the type of invite they have...

 

But I get along fairly happily with the following agreement:

- FSF is game forcing at the 3-level

- FSF is invitational only at the 2-level, but if opener rebids above 2NT that is game forcing. Therefore opener has to make a 2-level bid on a minimum (with, say, a 1255 minimum after 1D - 1S - 2C - 2H opener will bid 2S which is alerted as 'any minimum without a heart top'; after 1H - 1S - 2C - 2D opener has the choice of 2H, 2S or 2NT with a minimum.)