Is this a forcing pass situation?

[matmat]

(1♠)-P-(1NT)-X;

(2♣)-P-(3♣)-4♥;

(P) - P-(5♣)...

 

after opps make the 5♣ call, are we in a forcing pass situation?

[pclayton]

No

[jdonn]

No

Sorry Phil, the correct answer is "heck no!"

[Fluffy]

There is a point for having forcing pass when the contract was obviously bid with no intention of making, but the rules for that case are normally obscure.

[ArtK78]

It is interesting that the panel dismisses this as a clear-cut case - not a forcing pass.

 

It was mentioned that when it is clear that the opponents made the last bid without any intention that the contract was making, perhaps it is now a forcing pass situation. That makes a lot of sense to me. LHO made a non-forcing 3♣ call and then bid 5♣ after his partner passed over your 4♥ call. It is absolutely clear that the 5♣ call was not bid to make; hence, we cannot let them play in 5♣ undoubled.

 

So why is a pass over 5♣ not a forcing pass?

[pclayton]

It is interesting that the panel dismisses this as a clear-cut case - not a forcing pass.

 

It was mentioned that when it is clear that the opponents made the last bid without any intention that the contract was making, perhaps it is now a forcing pass situation.  That makes a lot of sense to me.  LHO made a non-forcing 3♣ call and then bid 5♣ after his partner passed over your 4♥ call.  It is absolutely clear that the 5♣ call was not bid to make; hence, we cannot let them play in 5♣ undoubled.

 

So why is a pass over 5♣ not a forcing pass?

Because:

 

1. RHO might have been walking the dog

2. RHO is bidding 5♣ as a 2-way shot (maybe he thinks he can make 5♣ or maybe he thinks we can make 4♥) or both.

3. RHO is nuts

 

or...

 

4. Our 4♥ call has caused RHO to re-evaluate and that 5♣ isn't so crazy after all.

[helene_t]

Phil's arguments is a case of the more general principle that it's better to rely on partner's bidding than on opps'. Opps are notoriously unreliable.

 

So the question is if the 4♥ bid promises enough strength to set up an FP.

[whereagles]

Forcing pass??? Why the heck you're going to ask pard for cooperation when it's 100% clear he has a flat hand with 0-2 hcp...?

[ArtK78]

Forcing pass??? Why the heck you're going to ask pard for cooperation when it's 100% clear he has a flat hand with 0-2 hcp...?

Partner has made one meaningful call in the auction - his pass over 2♣. Neither his initial pass nor his pass over 4♥ denied a hand with some values. His pass over 2♣ limited his hand, but not to a flat hand with 0-2 HCP.

 

Partner's hand is still relatively undefined, except that I would be surprised if he had a good suit with more than 5 HCP or a flat hand with more than 7 HCP.

 

It is unlikely that RHO is walking the dog, since there was a very good chance that his 3♣ bid was going to end the auction when he bid it. A two-way shot is possible, but I would bet that he expects to make 9 or 10 tricks when he bids 5♣. Unfortunately, we were not given the vulnerability or the form of scoring when the problem was presented.

 

Is RHO nuts? That is a possibility.

 

In any event, my bidding clearly showed a very powerful hand, willing to play game opposite nothing in a live auction with both opponents bidding. While one may be able to construct a hand consistent with the bidding on which it is right to pass out 5♣ undoubled, I suspect that it will be right to either double them or bid on on a vast majority of hands.

 

Therefore, if I pass over 5♣, it should be a forcing pass.

[jdonn]

4. Our 4♥ call has caused RHO to re-evaluate and that 5♣ isn't so crazy after all.

This is the real reason. Give him five clubs and xxx(x) of hearts.

 

Whereagles has a real point here. A forcing pass just transfers the guess to partner, who will be too weak to have a good idea of what is right.

[han]

I voted for 6C but my regular partner seems to think that 4C shows a powerhouse. It obviously depends on what you expect.

 

I wouldn't play this as a forcing pass.

[Fluffy]

I voted for 6C but my regular partner seems to think that 4C shows a powerhouse. It obviously depends on what you expect.

 

I wouldn't play this as a forcing pass.

you are driving the wrong way!

[matmat]

I voted for 6C but my regular partner seems to think that 4C shows a powerhouse. It obviously depends on what you expect.

 

I wouldn't play this as a forcing pass.

como?

 

:)

[matmat]

this happened earlier today when i was kibbing and south (the doubler and 4h bidder) was adamant that his pass over 5♣ was forcing I disagreed and was summarily told off... so just wanted to see what others thought...

[han]

I voted for 6C but my regular partner seems to think that 4C shows a powerhouse. It obviously depends on what you expect.

 

I wouldn't play this as a forcing pass.

you are driving the wrong way!

I think I posted in the wrong thread, I meant to react to the leaping michaels question.

[mikeh]

Whether this is a FP situation depends on what we think the 4♥ bidder has shown. To me, this is a FP. He did not bid 4♥ over 1N, and he did not bid 3♥ over 3♣, either of which would NOT have been FP.

 

Instead, he doubled and then jumped, so he does not have a one-dimensional hand. He has power.

 

Sure, the odds are that partner is broke or close to broke, but FP decisions are not made exclusively on high card strength. Advancer has NOT had a chance to describe his (weakish or worse) hand. He denied the ability to bid over 2♣, and could hardly be bidding over 4♥, but that still leaves a very wide range of hands.

 

The 4♥ bidder has a hand that may make 11 tricks in hearts opposite a suitable minimum and not get rich against 5♣.

 

This has all the hallmarks of a FP. The opps could have played 3♣. We bid a game in a power sequence... we clearly expected to make at least 10 tricks while the opps had contracted, voluntarily, for 9.

 

I will NEVER allow the speculation that the opps are walking the dog to deflect me from thinking logically about the hand. BTW, if they are walking the dog, then I assure you that 5♥ will be a cheap save :lol: And on such hands, where Rover is out for a stroll, partner may be able to discern the fact.

[awm]

I normally have a general agreement that if, on the auction, it's possible for one partner to have a balanced zero count, then pass is not forcing. In other words, there's no way for one partner to unilaterally set up a forcing pass on an auction where the other partner can have nothing.

 

I'm well aware that this agreement seems to be non-standard.

[jdonn]

I normally have a general agreement that if, on the auction, it's possible for one partner to have a balanced zero count, then pass is not forcing. In other words, there's no way for one partner to unilaterally set up a forcing pass on an auction where the other partner can have nothing.

 

I'm well aware that this agreement seems to be non-standard.

This includes when you open 2♣?

[awm]

This includes when you open 2♣?

Yes. Typically I play an agreement where "pass shows values" over direct interference, so this is indeed a "forcing pass" (but doesn't violate the rule about no forcing passes when one partner could have zero).

 

On the other hand, I would not consider the following auction as forcing:

 

2♣ (strong) - Pass - 2♥ (0-2 hcp) - 3♦ - Pass....

 

or even:

 

2♣ (strong) - Pass - 2♦ (waiting, could be neg) - 3♦ - Pass...

 

another one I don't consider forcing is:

 

1NT (weak) - X (penalty) - 2♣ (natural NF) - Pass...

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I would say no, but my partner would say yes.

 

His reason being, 4H was bid to make, i.e. the bid

it self said, the partnership has enough strength to

make game.

In theory I agree with him, but I may bid differently

on the table.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[joker_gib]

Whether this is a FP situation depends on what we think the 4♥ bidder has shown. To me, this is a FP. He did not bid 4♥ over 1N, and he did not bid 3♥ over 3♣, either of which would NOT have been FP.

 

Instead, he doubled and then jumped, so he does not have a one-dimensional hand. He has power.

 

Sure, the odds are that partner is broke or close to broke, but FP decisions are not made exclusively on high card strength. Advancer has NOT had a chance to describe his (weakish or worse) hand. He denied the ability to bid over 2♣, and could hardly be bidding over 4♥, but that still leaves a very wide range of hands.

 

The 4♥ bidder has a hand that may make 11 tricks in hearts opposite a suitable minimum and not get rich against 5♣.

 

This has all the hallmarks of a FP. The opps could have played 3♣. We bid a game in a power sequence... we clearly expected to make at least 10 tricks while the opps had contracted, voluntarily, for 9.

 

I will NEVER allow the speculation that the opps are walking the dog to deflect me from thinking logically about the hand. BTW, if they are walking the dog, then I assure you that 5♥ will be a cheap save :ph34r: And on such hands, where Rover is out for a stroll, partner may be able to discern the fact.

I agree with Mike here.

 

For me 4h comes from a powerhouse and I would not let the opponents play this undoubled.

 

If it's a make, ok, next one...

 

Alain

[matmat]

for those that do feel that this is a forcing pass situation, I don't really see how p, with a balanced nothing hand is supposed to know whether 5H or X is the appropriate action, especially as the nature of the strong hand is not fully clarified by the 4h call entirely?

[P_Marlowe]

for those that do feel that this is a forcing pass situation, I don't really see how p, with a balanced nothing hand is supposed to know whether 5H or X is the appropriate action, especially as the nature of the strong hand is not fully clarified by the 4h call entirely?

Correct, ... thats why the forcing pass.

The forcing pass clarifies the nature of the

hand further.

 

Having said that, partner will most of the time

double, but not always, your partner wont have

a lot to contribute, but this little bit maybe helpful,

and trying to get partner involved in the decicion

making is better than making the decsion on your

own, when you are at a guess.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[matmat]

sorry, to me it does not clarify in a situation when I hold, say, a flat yarb or 2 count or something. The fact that p doesn't know what to do with his presumed powerhouse makes it even less clear for my hand. I am not in a position where I feel i can make an informed decision. I guess that probably means i should double, since bidding on is not clear, but then my double is based tricks that p is going to take, with me having little to no chance of doing so, correct?

[Halo]

IMO partner has bid strongly and descriptively, and is entitled to consult with me on the next move, so Forcing Pass.

 

It is dangerous to believe opponents, but I don't want completely to ignore their auction.