jillybean Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 [hv=d=w&v=a&n=sk76h64dakt53ck83&s=sat3hak532dq976c7]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South Pass 1♦ Pass 1♥ Pass 1NT Pass 2♠ Pass 3♠ Pass 4♦ Pass Pass Pass Ignore Norths bidding. Comments on souths bidding, 4♦ must be forcing here - agree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 Yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilkaz Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 4♦ is forcing all day long after your reverse. Opener should have bid NT rather than raising ♠ with three pieces. Having missed 3NT, opener should be happy to raise to 5♦. The fewer hands without comp that you play in 4m, the better you will score at IMPs. This hand shows the issues that occur when you don't play some kind of NMF or XYZ or checkback after a 1NT rebid. You invented a reverse with only 3♠ to force, and PD then missbid. I don't know why more players (outside of BBO forum) don't play XYZ ? Then you can bid 2D and force to game here and find out most of what you want to know..ie that PD has only 2♥ and end up in 3NT or even ♦ (and 6 has play with good splits) That being said, many do play NMF. But so many different versions exist. Perhaps someone will link you to a simple version. .. neilkaz .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted October 3, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 Thanks Im ok with nmf and checkback, I dont know if this partner played either. Im not sure about XYZ but I know it has been discussed on here before. I'll go hunting for it or if anyone has the thread please post it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 uber-forcing, I'd say ^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 Well, yes 4♦ is forcing, but the bad news is that it's a cuebid for spades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted October 3, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 Yes, so it is. :huh: It looks like my only option to save this was to bid 5♦ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matmat Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 don't you play some sort of new minor forcing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vuroth Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 Well, yes 4♦ is forcing, but the bad news is that it's a cuebid for spades. I think I agree with this. It would have taken me a minute to puzzle this out at the table, though. Is there no better way (shot of gadgets) to show GF in diamonds over 1NT? For example, what would 1♦-1♥-1NT-3♦ show? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted October 3, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 don't you play some sort of new minor forcing? this is with a pick up partner, no agreements Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 Yes, so it is. :) It looks like my only option to save this was to bid 5♦ Over 3♠?I'd not try that if I were you - partner wouldn't know if this was natural, splinter - or help us all - Exclusion Blackwood.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quantumcat Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 What would 3♦ show, instead of the 2♠? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 don't you play some sort of new minor forcing? this is with a pick up partner, no agreements I would think if you are playing with a pickup partner, int or higher self rated then even with zero discussion(common) a bid of a new minor must be one round forcing at a minimum. one x...one y......1nt........2new minor. IF partner did not mean it that way, you can always discuss it after the deal. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 What would 3♦ show, instead of the 2♠? 3♦ would be invitational. I believe 2♠ is the best bid playing SAYC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matmat Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 What would 3♦ show, instead of the 2♠? 3♦ would be invitational. I believe 2♠ is the best bid playing SAYC. i thought NMF was part of sayc... (note: i don't know sayc) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vuroth Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 As someone who is trying to play as few gadgets as possible, NMF is not in SAYC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted October 3, 2007 Report Share Posted October 3, 2007 Hi, yes 4D is forcing, more precise it is a cue, showing a top honor in diamond. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quantumcat Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 But I don't understand. Doesn't 2♠ show four cards? Or is it okay to lie, because partner's not going to be involved much in the decision making except for answering your questions. (This is just in general) What if spades get set as the suit when there isn't actually a fit? You might not mind knowing about the king of spades then just bid 6 or 7 diamonds but what if you want to sign off in 5♦ and you can't, because that would be asking for the queen! Like, 4NT - 5♣ (1 or 4) - 5♦ (queen?/sign off)- 6♦ (no).... Is there really absolutely no genuine forcing bid except to fake the spades to make a reverse? Surely this problem must come up a lot, and someone has solved it by now. Is that what NMF is? (what is it) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vang Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 As someone who is trying to play as few gadgets as possible, NMF is not in SAYC.i'm not sure if there is a definitive reference for SAYC, but cf http://www.amazon.com/Standard-Bidding-Say...y/dp/1897106033NMF IS in SAYC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quantumcat Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 What is it?? Is it a forcing bid after a rebid of 1NT? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 As someone who is trying to play as few gadgets as possible, NMF is not in SAYC.i'm not sure if there is a definitive reference for SAYC, but cf http://www.amazon.com/Standard-Bidding-Say...y/dp/1897106033NMF IS in SAYC. Hi, there is.http://web2.acbl.org/documentlibrary/play/...gle%20pages.pdf And much to my surprise, you find on page 4, that 2C / 2 D bids in the sequence 1H - 1S1NT - 2C / 2D are non forcing, hence NMF is not part of SAYC. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 But I don't understand. Doesn't 2♠ show four cards? Or is it okay to lie, because partner's not going to be involved much in the decision making except for answering your questions. First of all, missing a suitable bid, you have to lie,but a better wording is, you have to "improvise". Second, 2S shows in theory a 4 card suit, butmainly it shows a 5 card heart suit and spade values.Depending on your style, the 1NT bid already denied a 4 card spade suit.So South should have bid 3NT over 3S or 5D,although a 5D bid is dangerous as well. Third, NMF or what ever response structure you are playing, tries to solve those problems. But the main problem with the auction and the 2S bid in particular is, that South tried to go sientific, knowing, that there were no partnership agreement.Instead of bidding 2S he should either bid 3NT or if he wanted to look for slam 4C (a splinter) or 4D. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 don't you play some sort of new minor forcing? this is with a pick up partner, no agreements I would think if you are playing with a pickup partner, int or higher self rated then even with zero discussion(common) a bid of a new minor must be one round forcing at a minimum. one x...one y......1nt........2new minor. IF partner did not mean it that way, you can always discuss it after the deal. :) No. Geography hits again. If you are playing with an English partner, then with zero discussion: 1C - 1H - 1NT - 2D shows a weak hand with diamonds and hearts. 1D - 1H - 1NT - 2C is either 'checkback' (equivalent of NMF) or a weak hand with clubs and hearts... I'd hate to have to guess which. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matmat Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 1H - 1S1NT - 2C / 2D are non forcing, hence NMF is not part of SAYC. how about 1c - 1M1N - 2d or 1d - 1M1n - 2c there is a subtle difference between these auctions and the one where both majors are bid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 don't you play some sort of new minor forcing? this is with a pick up partner, no agreements I would think if you are playing with a pickup partner, int or higher self rated then even with zero discussion(common) a bid of a new minor must be one round forcing at a minimum. one x...one y......1nt........2new minor. IF partner did not mean it that way, you can always discuss it after the deal. :) No. Geography hits again. If you are playing with an English partner, then with zero discussion: 1C - 1H - 1NT - 2D shows a weak hand with diamonds and hearts. 1D - 1H - 1NT - 2C is either 'checkback' (equivalent of NMF) or a weak hand with clubs and hearts... I'd hate to have to guess which. no? I thought I said...you can discuss after deal if new minor 2 level was not forcing?????? We assume zero discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts