dburn Posted November 10, 2007 Report Share Posted November 10, 2007 Technically, of course, "forward-going" cannot be applied to any non-forcing call, since if partner passes it we have not gone forward, which contradicts the original description. "Forward-looking" would be better, but it is far too late to expect bridge players (who have already espoused such terms as "semi-forcing") to start speaking English. One might, I suppose, claim that any bid other than pass is "forward-going", since it has in and of itself moved the auction forward. One would hesitate, for aesthetic reasons only, to apply the description "forward-going" to the last bid in the uncontested auction 1NT-2♥ (transfer)-2♠, but if you are going to use meaningless terminology, you must accustom yourself to thinking meaningless thoughts. The whimsical notion has also been introduced that in the contested auction Pass-4♦-4♠-Pass, 5♣ should show "five-level safety". Given that ♠AJ109xxx ♥x ♦Qx ♣Kxx is a 4♠ overcall of a 4♦ opening, it is not easy to construct a passed hand that will be safe at the five level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted November 10, 2007 Report Share Posted November 10, 2007 Very enlightening, although I believe that we are not a passed hand in this thread http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=22194. What do you think 5C is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dburn Posted November 10, 2007 Report Share Posted November 10, 2007 I believe that 5C expresses the opinion that, all in all, the best I can do to maximise our side's chances of obtaining a good result on the current deal is to offer to take eleven tricks with clubs as trumps. After all, that is what the majority of 5C bids mean without prior agreement to the contrary. Partner may have a contrary view that he is at liberty to express - as Frances says, if he believes that if I think I can take eleven tricks, I can in fact take twelve or thirteen, he may act accordingly. Other views are possible, and every partnership aiming at expert status should consider them. For example, it is generally thought that if partner opens 4S, it is more useful on grounds of frequency to play 5C as a slam try in spades, not a game try in clubs. Does this apply when partner has overcalled 4D with 4S? Here the "grounds of frequency" argument is unlikely to be of much value, since such sequences are not very frequent at all. But a good partnership might at least have the basic agreement that all undiscussed bids are natural if they can be natural. That way, at least it will be clear to the West on the actual hand that he ought to try 5S if anything, and not 5C. Of course, if North opens 3H, East bids 4D, South passes and West bids 4NT, that can be natural. Should it be? Maybe 4H should be Blackwood... These facts should all be noted downAnd ruminated onBy every boy in Oxford townWho wants to be a Don. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bid_em_up Posted November 10, 2007 Report Share Posted November 10, 2007 how about this: forcingrarely passedhighly invitationalinvitationalforward-goingconstructivenon-forcingsign-off these are distinguished by the % of the time that partner passes, ranging from 0% to 100%-unless-he-has-missorted-his-hand-totally Sure, this sounds reasonable....would you mind actually assigning some approximate percentages to each breakdown/category that you list? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted November 10, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2007 These facts should all be noted downAnd ruminated onBy every boy in Oxford townWho wants to be a Don. That rhyme brought a tear to my eye. Especially the happy ending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted November 10, 2007 Report Share Posted November 10, 2007 Sure, this sounds reasonable....would you mind actually assigning some approximate percentages to each breakdown/category that you list? When I say forward-going I'm thinking of p bidding on with something like 50% of hands. Could be 30%, could be 70%. For the 30% case, "mildly positive" may be a more accurate description. For 70%, "invitational" may be more accurate. In this particular case, I think it's (way) below 50%. So maybe "mildly positive" would be more accurate. However, I have only one way of showing clubs without comiting to slam (and even if I want to commit to slam, I have probably no way of distinguishing between clubs-only and clubs-with-spade-tolerance, or even 6-4 clubs/diamonds). So I will bid 5♣ on a wide range of hands, and p will sometimes guess wrong. Of course I will not bid 5♣ on garbage, and I will try to avoid it on slambound hands, but this is not a perfect World. Therefore I prefer the vague term "forward-going". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MickyB Posted November 10, 2007 Report Share Posted November 10, 2007 Clearly natural. (3♦)-4♠-(P)-5♣ is more interesting IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted November 10, 2007 Report Share Posted November 10, 2007 I'd say that that auction is clearly a cuebid Mike, just like after a 4S opener. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted November 10, 2007 Report Share Posted November 10, 2007 I'd say that that auction is clearly a cuebid Mike, just like after a 4S opener. Agree. As to the OP I think 5♣ should be natural and a suggestion to play. You expect to make opposite a normal 4♠ overcall; thus there are quite a few hands where partner will bid on. You won't bid 5♣ with a weak hand and a long suit with no support for partner where you only hope to go less down - with that hand you pass 4♠. Since RHO didn't double it's quite possible partner will do better than you expect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.