What Is Standard

[Apollo81]

New suit by Advancer: forcing or NF-constructive?

 

at

 

1-level

2-level over 1-level overcall

2-level over 2-level (non jump) overcall

[whereagles]

I've learned this:

 

1-level --> FORCING

2-level over 1-level overcall --> NON FORCING

2-level over 2-level (non jump) overcall --> FORCING

 

However, I now believe it's better to play everything as FORCING and, in case of a 3/2, GAME FORCING. This is recommended by Robson/Segal (implicitly - they never get to spell it out). Obviously, if RHO acts positively, you can now play all new suits as NF and/or fit-showing.

[helene_t]

As I understand it, in the US it depends on your region. What Whereagles describes is known in the Netherlands as French style. That's what I play in one partnership.

 

With most partners I play everything as forcing. For some reason, people here in Lancaster tend to play everything as forcing. It does require a narrow overcall range. Something like 7-14, while it is something like 10-17 with the Dutch p's with whom I play everything as forcing.

[P_Marlowe]

I dont know, what is standard, but I

played all responses as nonforcing

but constructive.

 

Currently I play 1 over 1 as forcing,

the rest as nonforcing, although

certain responses at the 2 level are

transfer responses, i.e. the question

forcing / nonforcing does not exist.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[dake50]

Expand xfer advances to all lowest level bids are xfers. Then all F1 by advancer 2nd bid when he wants 2 noises.

[skjaeran]

Without transfer advances 1 and 2 would be forcing for me, 3 constructive/semi-forcing (in practice I've never seen partner passing).

 

However I strongly prefer transfer advances.

[Roupoil]

i play 2/1 NF and others forcing, as in classical French style, but actually 2/1 are forcing in the latest vesrsion of SEF. A little bit confusing, as usual...

[pclayton]

I play it forcing unless its a 2/1. I'm pretty sure a lot of my friends play it NF throughout.

[gnasher]

In my experience it's an area where lots of people are certain that what they personally play is either "standard" or "the only way to play", and none of them ever agree.

[Guest Jlall]

jdonn once told me forcing is standard, then we had an argument, we decided to settle it with BWS and in BWS it is NF, but forcing is a leaf. So I think expert north american standard is NF.

[barmar]

When filling out the ACBL CC with new partners, I can't recall the last time anyone ever suggested anything other than NFConst. However, I think most players assume this only refers to same-level bids, and possibly only 1-level bids.

 

I think this has become common because the requirements for 1-level overcalls has decreased over the years. Years ago an overcall promised something approaching an opening hand, and advancer's bids were typically treated the same as if overcaller had opened. Now, with people overcalling on 8 counts and worse, you can easily get too high if advancer's bids were absolutely forcing.

[Apollo81]

jdonn once told me forcing is standard, then we had an argument, we decided to settle it with BWS and in BWS it is NF, but forcing is a leaf. So I think expert north american standard is NF.

even 2 over 2?

 

how about these auctions

 

(1h)-2d-(p)-2s

(p)-2n

 

(1h)-2d-(p)-2s

(p)-3c

 

I would have said these are both NF, but I wasnt sure about 2 over 2 (the 2s bid). I thought that 2 over 1 was NF