Forcing or not?

[foo]

My POV was that 1S-pa-1N-(2H);3C was =non forcing=.

 

Please don't mix me up with someone from the other camp.

 

What I was trying to say re: Hannie's example is that I consider that hand strong enough to GF in this auction.  So if 3C is Forcing, I'm using it.  If 3C is not, I'm bidding something that is.

 

But I'm going to Game, whether 3N, 4S, or 5C, with KQTxx_x_Ax_KQTxx in this auction.

 

I'll let one of the "Young Scientists" do the simulation to see how well it rates to work out. B)

Sorry if I misrepresented your POV about 3♣ not being forcing. I'm glad to see we agree on that much. My post still remains that given the example brought up by Hannie, on the hands where we belong in game partner is generally not passing a nonforcing 3♣ bid. That hand, as Hannie intended it to begin with, is a perfect example of why 3♣ should be nonforcing.

The better hand to show Hannie's POV as to why 3C should be NF here can be made by as little a change as switching the red suits:

 

KQTxx_Ax_x_KQTxx (instead of what Hannie gave: KQTxx_x_Ax_KQTxx )

 

To paraphrase Robson & Segel, Ax in Their suit is far more defensive than Ax in what is likely to ne one of Our suits.

 

ATT, I would literally bid these two hands differently.

[kenrexford]

The forcers pass with KQ10xx x Ax KQ10xx?

2NT.

[helene_t]

I think it should be invitational no matter if one plays GB2NT or not.

 

Without GB2NT, a strong hand can cue and a weak hand can pass.

 

With GB2NT, 2NT can be used with either a weak or a strong hand.

 

Alternatively on could play 2NT as invitational or stronger and 3♣ as weak. I think van Cleff/vd Neut play it that way. (I might be confusing them with some other Dutch pair).

[foo]

I think it should be invitational no matter if one plays GB2NT or not.

 

Without GB2NT, a strong hand can cue and a weak hand can pass.

 

With GB2NT, 2NT can be used with either a weak or a strong hand.

 

Alternatively on could play 2NT as invitational or stronger and 3♣ as weak. I think van Cleff/vd Neut play it that way. (I might be confusing them with some other Dutch pair).

I think we've established that the standard meaning here is for

1M-pa-1N-(foo);bar

 

To be Invitational.

 

Now it appears the issue is to nail down what hands qualify as Invitational :)

[benlessard]

In a really expert partnership i would expect 2nt GB or be quasi-standard. But in a not-so clear expert casual ' its in case of doubt its forcing' rule apply for me.

[foo]

In a really expert partnership i would expect 2nt GB or be quasi-standard. But in a not-so clear expert casual ' its in case of doubt its forcing' rule apply for me.

Ah. The "all strange or unclear bids are Forcing" rule. :(