Is this a forcing pass situation?

[P_Marlowe]

sorry, to me it does not clarify in a situation when I hold, say, a flat yarb or 2 count or something. 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?

Ok, but in this case, you did ask the wrong question.

The correct question is, what does the message

"4H bidder made a forcing Pass" mean?

Which additional information did the forcing pass

provide.

 

If the 4H bidder makes the forcing pass, he says,

I am not sure, if i should bid on, trying to make 5H

or if I should take the money and defend.

=> He wont have an extreme freak, but he also will

not have a semibal. power house, because with this

hand he will double.

=> Most likely he will have a 6-4 distribution with

a club shortage and Hx in the 4th suit.

His 4 card suit will most likely not headed by the Ace,

KQxx is more likely.

 

And if you hold a flat yarb, this means you have no

ruffing feature, you have no interest in going after

your own game, because you have no tricks for your

partner.

But it may also be possible, that the 4H bidder found gold

in case you do hold a fit and a shortage (single or void

in clubs) and a 2nd shortage (doubleton).

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[whereagles]

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

It is often more dangerous to believe partner!!!

[joker_gib]

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

It is often more dangerous to believe partner!!!

LOL

 

Do you believe yourself ? :P :)

[whereagles]

I know what I'm doing. Can't say the same about pard... LOL.

[P_Marlowe]

I know what I'm doing. Can't say the same about pard... LOL.

Can we interview your partner? :)

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[mikeh]

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?

Yes.

 

The critical point, as far as I am concerned, is that the sequence of double then 4♥ is as powerful a sequence as one can imagine, short of a cue of 4♣ over 3♣... and to do that, and then pull diamonds to hearts, would show a hand with strong slam interest all by itself. As it is, the double then 4♥ is an announcement that he expects to make 4♥ opposite a flat yarb.

 

And the lack of just bidding 4♥ over 1N means that his confidence is not based on, for example Ax AKJxxxxxx x x. He has POWER and good hearts.

 

It is, I suppose, possible to construct hands consistent with the bidding where 5♣ makes and (I guess) where 5♥ goes down 2 or more...but that has to be very improbable.

 

And this possibility often arises in FP situations, on freaks. I think all experts agree that there are times when the best feasible result is -550 or -850 or so, defending an unbeatable doubled contract because of a FP situation. The long term gain from having FP sequences available offsets the occasional disaster.

 

That reasoning should, in my view, pertain here: partner SHOULD have what looks like 3+ winners on defence and 10 winners on offence. If we possess negative defence (we hold xxxx in ♥s for example) or extra offence (we hold the spade Ace for example) then we bid 5♥. If we are 4=2=4=3 or 5=2=4=2, we double.. not because we have defence but because we lack offence.

 

Of course, if you play that the 4♥ bidder will do this with 8 solid and an outside Ace, forget what I wrote :) But I don't think that his sequence shows that.

[jdonn]

Mike, what would you take a double by the 4♥ bidder to mean? I think THAT shows "POWER and good hearts." And if I were doubler's partner with xxxx of hearts I think you would agree it would be right to bid 5♥ whether partner made a forcing pass, nonforcing pass, or double. Of course there are no guarantees but no one is going to want to defend when he knows our side has 0 heart tricks. I still just think the gain from FP here is very minimal.

 

I would still take knowing for sure my pass is forcing over not being sure what I play :)

[Codo]

I agree with Mike, this is forcing.

We tell pd that we have power, hearts and that we are not sure whether 5 ClubX or 5 HEart is the best bet for our side.

Perfect.

Maybe th hand is osmething like AJx,AKQJxxx,Ax,x?

And pd can see if his hand is more xxxx,x,xxxxxx,xx and he doubles,

or xxxx,xxx,xxxx,xx and he pulls.

He may be wrong in both cases but chances are there that he gets it right.

 

P.S. I like the easiest FP rule: If you bid a game surely to make this is always a FP situation.

[cnszsun]

For those who don't play FP here, what do you play the double by 4♥ bidder?

I think it's reasonable to play double as action double (I have extra offence, but i also have fair defence, so it's up to partner's decision).

Anyway, it's rare for a 4♥ bidder to get a pure penalty double hand at the same time.

[mikeh]

 

I would still take knowing for sure my pass is forcing over not being sure what I play :)

I agree with this, but outside of a few very thorough partnerships, I doubt that many have discussed every situation, even tho most practiced expert partnerships will have general rules that apply to 98% or more of scenarios. My rules apply here to make this a forcing pass:

 

1. I have bid game on power, in a sequence announcing ownership of the hand (if your view of double then 4♥ is different, then you will have a different view)

 

2. The opps are clearly saving. If your view truly is that RHO bid 3...only 3 clubs... after limiting his hand with 1N and he is NOW always bidding to make, then your view will be different.

 

As I stated before, and as I think is beyond serious argument, any normal set of rules for FP scenarios will sometimes result in doubling a making contract. I doubt that it is possible to avoid this, and I have certainly not heard of anyone seriously saying that they could (while still retaining a viable FP structure). This includes the inversion approach.

 

So, is it possible that RHO has 'listened to the auction' and deduced that a weak raise to 3♣ is now worth a gf after I show power + long hearts? I suppose it might happen. But I might get hit by a bus tomorrow, when crossing the street. Life happens. Make the percentage call. Bid scared, and the opps own you.

 

Put another way: wouldn't I always double 5♣ when I have NO interest in 5♥?

 

And is it winning long-term bridge to double 1N, bid 4♥ and then defend 5♣ undoubled on this auction? Not in my world. But I may be mistaken :)

[han]

Nice post Mike, this may be useful to us (me!) beyond just this one hand.

[pclayton]

Mike, what would you take a double by the 4♥ bidder to mean? I think THAT shows "POWER and good hearts." And if I were doubler's partner with xxxx of hearts I think you would agree it would be right to bid 5♥ whether partner made a forcing pass, nonforcing pass, or double. Of course there are no guarantees but no one is going to want to defend when he knows our side has 0 heart tricks. I still just think the gain from FP here is very minimal.

 

I would still take knowing for sure my pass is forcing over not being sure what I play :)

Completely agree.

 

Forcing pass situations allow us to make three calls:

 

1. Double - which says "I have a minimum, defensively oriented hand"

 

2. Bid - which says "I have a minimum, offensively oriented hand, but I expect to make my bid"

 

3. Pass - which says either one of two things:

 

3A. I don't know what to do. If you double or pass, I'll be happy.

3B. I have some type of slam try and I'm taking another call over your next bid. Please keep in mind the pass-and-pull connotations after you hear my next bid.

 

In the given situation, there is simply no reason for 3B. If the doubler / 4♥ bidder had a hand where he wanted to invite slam opposite a useful bust, he could have cue bid something.

 

I'd like to check in with others, but I think if you don't require 3B, a forcing pass doesn't apply. .

 

If we wanted to pass the buck here, we could double. Double simply says "I have a powerful hand in the context of the auction and I'm happy to defend unless you have something you haven't had the opportunity to tell me about yet (like xxxx of trump, or possibly xxx with some key shortness)".

 

Double in the subject auction functions as 3A above.

[jdonn]

And is it winning long-term bridge to double 1N, bid 4♥ and then defend 5♣ undoubled on this auction? Not in my world. But I may be mistaken :)

I agree, I would rarely be letting them play undoubled anyway (<10% I'm sure). But the times that I did I'd be sure it would be a good decision :)

[awm]

It seems like in the given auction, the 4♥ bidder is looking at most of his side's assets. He will be in one of several situations:

 

(1) He's sure he can set 5♣, but thinks 5♥ might make opposite a suitable hand for a better score.

 

(2) He's not sure he can beat 5♣, but isn't convinced 5♥ will make either.

 

(3) He's sure he can make 5♥, and might want to consider 6♥.

 

(4) He's sure he can set 5♣, and is either sure 5♥ will fail or sure that it won't be as good as defending 5♣X.

 

It seems like hand (3) is not a factor, since with a serious chance of 6♥ he would've bid differently (cuebid) earlier and he can always bid 5♥ himself.

 

Basically, if you play pass as forcing you will pass on (1) and (2) to leave the decision to partner, and double on hand (4) which partner knows to leave in. You will lose occasionally in situation (2) when you're forced to double or compete and selling out to 5♣ might've been safest.

 

If you play pass as not forcing, you presumably double with both (1) and (4), and partner will pull on a hand that delivers extra offense or negative defense (for example long hearts). You pass in situation (2). You will lose occasionally in situation (4) when partner pulls the double and you'd have been better off defending.

 

Given the bidding, I'd bet that situation (4) is quite unlikely. The 4♥ bidder seems to have a lot of hearts and bid 4♥ to make. Opponents seem to have a lot of clubs. Assuming opponents are not insane, if 4♥ bidder's partner actually has a good fit for hearts it seems quite unlikely that 5♥ is failing or that 5♣ goes for more than the value of a game (since 4♥ bidder's side has basically no heart tricks on defense). I'd rather play pass as NF and pay off in situation (4), rather than be forced to double making games in situation (2).

[cherdano]

Forcing pass situations allow us to make three calls:

 

1. Double - which says "I have a minimum, defensively oriented hand"

 

2. Bid - which says "I have a minimum, offensively oriented hand, but I expect to make my bid"

 

3. Pass - which says either one of two things:

 

3A. I don't know what to do. If you double or pass, I'll be happy.

3B. I have some type of slam try and I'm taking another call over your next bid. Please keep in mind the pass-and-pull connotations after you hear my next bid.

 

I'd like to check in with others, but I think if you don't require 3B, a forcing pass doesn't apply.

Hmm. To me, the value of forcing pass is mostly to get the double-vs-bidding-on decision right. That you can use forcing pass as a slam try is only a secondary consideration, especially when you have in-between-steps available. (If you make a forcing pass, partner bids on, and you were originally planning to make a pass-and-pull slam try, then you often don't know what to do.)

 

Arend

[han]

That's true Arend, but do we need the forcing pass here to help partner? Partner knows that we expected to make 4H with very little help. Without the forcing pass we have available:

 

Double = Enough strength to beat 5C by ourselves. Partner may still pull to 5H if he thinks that will score better.

 

Pass = Not enough power to guarantee setting 5C or making 5H. Partner will usually either double 5C or bid 5H, but may pass with nothing useful for 5H and perhaps something on defense.

 

5H = what it means anyway.

 

It is not entirely clear to me whether the forcing pass will make it easier for partner. More importantly, I think we usually don't play forcing passes in such situations.

[cherdano]

Oh I wasn't saying that it is right to play forcing pass here, I was just disagreeing with Phil's logic "noone can have a slam try ==> pass can't be forcing" (if I understood Phil correctly).

[han]

Ah ok, agree of course.

[pclayton]

Oh I wasn't saying that it is right to play forcing pass here, I was just disagreeing with Phil's logic "noone can have a slam try ==> pass can't be forcing" (if I understood Phil correctly).

I just floated the question for discussion.

 

I think occasionally its useful to have a forcing pass because you really don't know what to do, but that seems to me thats what a double in this case means. We have already shown a very offensive hand and if a pass was forcing, obviously we would be sitting for pard's double.

 

Pard heard our strong sequence, and could compete himself if necessary. Even if pass isn't forcing, pard isn't barred. I would expect in some cases that pard can double with short hearts and an outside trick, or that pard can compete with trump support and maybe shortness. Aren't these the kind of hands a forcing pass caters to?

 

OTOH, pard will more typically hold a 4=2=4=3 in this auction and not have a clue what to do over a 'forcing pass'. Aren't these the kinds of hands that we want pard to pass? Do we really have to double 5♣ for -1, just because in a vacuum pass should theoretically be forcing?

 

I really don't have any set opinions here, I'm just questioning the wisdom of a FP in this sequence.

 

One more thing. I've always believed that FP rules should be very simple. You gain a sliver of accuracy for bidding, but the penalty for being wrong can be very expensive.

[whereagles]

One more thing. I've always believed that FP rules should be very simple. You gain a sliver of accuracy for bidding, but the penalty for being wrong can be very expensive.

That is very, very true.