negative free bids

[shevek]

We play neg free bids after our natural openings.

For us 1♥ = 4+♥s, 11-15 pts

 

So 1♥ - (1♠) - 2♣ is non-forcing, say 6-10 pts, often 6-cd suit.

 

Okay, what is this:

 

So 1♥ - (1♠) - 3♣ ?

 

Could be

- pre-emptive but that duplicates 2♣ to some extent

- GF, though some of those hands can double

- fit-showing

- Bergen

- ?

 

What do you think?

[Free]

Fit jump

[andy_h]

Not a big fan of negative freebids myself, but I think fit-showing would be the better treatment out of the ones suggested.

[Finch]

Game forcing and natural.

 

I play some NFBs (disturbed 2M only) and it's really tough to sort out the auction later if you put the game forcing single-suiters in the double as well as everything else.

 

Take 1H (2C) ? if you play 2S as non-forcing.

You have to double with game-forcing hands with 5 spades

 

KQxxx

Kx

Axx

Kxx

 

because you don't know what the right strain is, so these hands double, then bid 3S over 2NT from partner (or whatever).

 

If you are also doubling on

AKQxxx

x

AKx

Kxx

 

it gets really hard to sort out what suit to play in

[brianshark]

Natural, GF, very good suit.

[jtfanclub]

At least I have an excuse for not being standard this time!

 

For me it's...drumroll please...miniSplinter. Same as without the interference.

 

1) Easy to remember, since it's the same as without the interference.

2) VERY hard to show this hand without Minisplinter being available.

3) Reasonably common.

4) If I do have a GF hand with clubs, I just want to X. Half the time, I'll bid 3NT next and never show the clubs at all (if partner shows a balanced minimum with a spade stop, for example). If I'm forcing game anyways, I don't see any reason to use up valuable space.

 

Edit: With my limited mental capacity, I can't see how this is inferior to distribution or GF. With the alternate auction 1♥ (2♣), I can certainly see why 3♠ might be more valuable as a GF natural bid, especially since you just bypassed 3♥.

[dake50]

Try xfer advances here. Always a 2nd bid if wanted.

Super-accept finds that fit to advance/not.

Refuse xfer is very unusual hand: 5-5-3-0, 7-4-1-1 eg.

 

I think this handles the weak signoff hand, the 2-suiter, the help suit raise, and adds an immediate raise to contrast a xfer raise. And freeing 'above xfers' to be picture bids.

[shevek]

Game forcing and natural.

 

I play some NFBs (disturbed 2M only) and it's really tough to sort out the auction later if you put the game forcing single-suiters in the double as well as everything else.

 

Take 1H (2C) ? if you play 2S as non-forcing.

You have to double with game-forcing hands with 5 spades

 

KQxxx

Kx

Axx

Kxx

 

because you don't know what the right strain is, so these hands double, then bid 3S over 2NT from partner (or whatever).

 

If you are also doubling on

AKQxxx

x

AKx

Kxx

 

it gets really hard to sort out what suit to play in

A jump shift to 3♠ may as well be natural since a fit-jump makes little sense.

 

1♠ - (2♣) - 3♥

 

could be different. You might not play NFBs here since 2♥ was not dislodged. However, if 2♥ would not be forcing, is 3♥ best as a good 1-suiter?

 

Perhaps, since a fit-jump is rare and less useful when we have both majors.

The best fit-jumps gain most when they help partner bid at the 5-level, such as

1♥ - (1♠) - 3♣* - (4♠)

?

 

3♣ might work a treat here.

[bill1157]

I have wondered why negative free bids arent standard, it would make sense to double then bid with a strong hand, treating the negative double like a take out double.

With this treatment jump shift needs to be strong.

 

Bill

[akhare]

Try xfer advances here. Always a 2nd bid if wanted.

Super-accept finds that fit to advance/not.

Refuse xfer is very unusual hand: 5-5-3-0, 7-4-1-1 eg.

 

I think this handles the weak signoff hand, the 2-suiter, the help suit raise, and adds an immediate raise to contrast a xfer raise. And freeing 'above xfers' to be picture bids.

Can you elaborate on this approach?

 

So 1N -> 2♣, 2♣ -> 2♦, etc or only when there's a jump involved?

 

Also, if it's the former, what about the natural 1N bid over an overcall?

[awm]

Negative free bids have never worked all that well for me. The issue is, say we have some auction like:

 

1♥ - (2♣) - 2♠*

 

*Negative free bid; non-forcing

 

The question is what opener should have to pass. If 2♠ can include anything less than game-forcing values, it seems like opener needs to bid again even with very mild extras regardless of fit (and should also bid again with a good fit for spades). But this means opener is rarely passing, and seems to hang responder when 2♠ was bid on a pretty weak hand.

 

On the other hand, if 2♠ is truly a weak hand and opener should almost always pass without a big fit or freak distribution, then what exactly are you doing with the invites? It seems like packing both invitational and game-forcing spade hands into the double will be problematic.

 

Honestly I have this problem with virtually all non-forcing bids. Obviously you have to play some non-forcing bids or you can never stop bidding! But it seems like you want one of: non-forcing bid has a fairly narrow range so partner can always evaluate whether to pass; or non-forcing bid denies the strength for game on values despite a wide range, so partner passes without a big fit or freak shape. Otherwise you get these bids which are "technically not forcing but virtually never passed" in which case it seems generally better to just play them as forcing (they weren't getting passed much anyway, and playing them forcing helps you bid the stronger hands).

[jtfanclub]

Negative free bids have never worked all that well for me. The issue is, say we have some auction like:

 

1♥ - (2♣) - 2♠*

 

*Negative free bid; non-forcing

 

The question is what opener should have to pass. If 2♠ can include anything less than game-forcing values, it seems like opener needs to bid again even with very mild extras regardless of fit (and should also bid again with a good fit for spades). But this means opener is rarely passing, and seems to hang responder when 2♠ was bid on a pretty weak hand.

?

 

Take the auction 1♥ - (2♣) - X - (3♣) in a non negative free bid auction.

 

Do you bid again? Well, if the X is a weak hand with spades blah blah blah, and if it's almost enough for a game force you should blah blah blah.

 

Whether you use X or 2♠ here for the negative bid, it doesn't matter. You're still going to be up for a major decision. Even if the X is passed,you still have to decide whether you're going to do without anywhere near enough information. What if you have 3 spades...now not only do you have to worry about level, you have to worry about fit.

 

Playing Negative Free Bids, you have more information to make the choice with. After 1♥ - (2♣) 2♠, you know partner has a 5 card suit, for one thing. Most people play it with a fairly serious bottom on it as well. You're far better off when you have spades and not enough to force game playing negative free bids.

 

Negative Free Bids get hurt because they put far too many GF bids into X. If you're having more difficulty with non GF auctions with NFBs, well, either you're not looking at it carefully or it's just inexperience with the system.

[rbforster]

Playing Negative Free Bids, you have more information to make the choice with.  After 1♥ - (2♣) 2♠, you know partner has a 5 card suit, for one thing.  Most people play it with a fairly serious bottom on it as well.  You're far better off when you have spades and not enough to force game playing negative free bids.

What about when responder has 4 spades and constructive or invitational values and you play NFB's - does he have a bid? X would be GF and he can't bid 2♠ promising 5. Seems like a standard takeout X caters to this pretty well. (Maybe I'm missing something since I haven't played NFBs though)

[fromageGB]

In one regular partnership we've decided that if the bidding goes 1M (2m) we keep 3♣ and 3♦ as major support game invitations with 3 and 4 cards respectively, keeping 2M and 3M as weaker preemptive raises. For the 2 unbid suits we play transfers, which, as someone said earlier, cater for weak, invitational, or forcing hands. 2NT is a transfer to the other minor, and X a transfer to the other major. 2 or 3 of the other major are 4 card, invitational and forcing respectively.

 

It seems to work.

 

The game forcing hand Frances posted, after 1♥ (2♣)

KQxxx

Kx

Axx

Kxx

bids X - 2♠ - 3♣

whereas a weak 2 type hand (or the usual hand for a NFB) will pass 2♠, and an invitational hand makes a natural rebid of 2NT or 3♠ or 3♥.

[Guest Jlall]

def play the jumps as strong if you play NFB.

[awm]

Take the auction 1♥ - (2♣) - X - (3♣) in a non negative free bid auction.

 

Do you bid again? Well, if the X is a weak hand with spades blah blah blah, and if it's almost enough for a game force you should blah blah blah.

This is not that difficult, because if you pass, partner is guaranteed another bid. Basically you bid with extras and pass without them. Partner will always have one of:

 

(1) A weak hand with semi-balanced shape, which passes at next opportunity.

(2) A weak hand with a long spade suit, or with a long diamond suit and four spades, which bids the long suit at next opportunity.

(3) An invitational (or better) hand with semi-balanced shape, which doubles again or raises a bid (bids show extras remember) to game.

 

Holding an invitational or better hand with a long suit, you bid the suit (forcing free bid).

 

Now say you play negative free bids with up to game force values. Here double and bid is always a game force. It is true that you may be better placed in further competition when partner has a weak hand (gets to show his suit) and worse placed when partner has the game force (has to double, might get uncomfortable later).

 

But my issue was with the auction 1♥-(2♣)-2♠*-(PASS). When does opener bid again? Suppose opener has a bit extra, like 14-15 hcp without any great fit for spades. Since 2♠ could be 10-11 hcp you can't really pass. But 2♠ could also be 6-7 hcp and you really have to pass. This problem doesn't really exist if you play forcing free bids -- there the 2♠ call would guarantee enough for game opposite 14-15 so you game force, and if partner has the 6-7 point hand he would double, you would bid something, and then he would correct to 2♠.

 

Note that the problem goes away if opponents raise to 3♣ since now you can pass and partner gets another chance to call with the "true invite" or to pass and defend with the 6-7 hand.

[jtfanclub]

This is not that difficult, because if you pass, partner is guaranteed another bid. Basically you bid with extras and pass without them. Partner will always have one of:

 

(1) A weak hand with semi-balanced shape, which passes at next opportunity.

(2) A weak hand with a long spade suit, or with a long diamond suit and four spades, which bids the long suit at next opportunity.

(3) An invitational (or better) hand with semi-balanced shape, which doubles again or raises a bid (bids show extras remember) to game.

 

The problem is, if partner has hand 1, you probably want to let them play 3♣.

 

Suppose opener has a bit extra, like 14-15 hcp without any great fit for spades.

 

That seems fair. On the regular auction 1♥-(2♣)-2♠-(3♣), what do you do as opener? If you pass, and partner has a 10 count with no great love for hearts, he's going to pass. And there you have it, when 3NT or 4♠ could be a great place to play. Of course, if you have an 11 count with a singleton spade, if partner reopens with a balanced 10 he'll seriously regret it.

 

For NFBs, I have a very simple rule I tell people when I play with them. If you have a balanced 12 count, you should feel safe in passing. If you have a balanced 15 count, you should feel safe in bidding to game. With 13-14, use your judgement, but usually invite if you have the space.

 

This doesn't mean that I have 10 points. I could have, say, seven spades to the AQ and nothing else to speak of. But I'm perfectly happy being in 4♠ with that across an average balanced 15 count.

 

NFBs for me are not point count bids. They're a bid that wants to be at where you bid when partner has nothing extra and at game with a full trick extra, and at least mild support. That's a fairly narrow range, and should make it easy for opener.

[shevek]

Negative free bids have never worked all that well for me. The issue is, say we have some auction like:

 

1♥ - (2♣) - 2♠*

 

*Negative free bid; non-forcing

 

The question is what opener should have to pass. If 2♠ can include anything less than game-forcing values, it seems like opener needs to bid again even with very mild extras regardless of fit (and should also bid again with a good fit for spades). But this means opener is rarely passing, and seems to hang responder when 2♠ was bid on a pretty weak hand.

 

On the other hand, if 2♠ is truly a weak hand and opener should almost always pass without a big fit or freak distribution, then what exactly are you doing with the invites? It seems like packing both invitational and game-forcing spade hands into the double will be problematic.

 

Honestly I have this problem with virtually all non-forcing bids. Obviously you have to play some non-forcing bids or you can never stop bidding! But it seems like you want one of: non-forcing bid has a fairly narrow range so partner can always evaluate whether to pass; or non-forcing bid denies the strength for game on values despite a wide range, so partner passes without a big fit or freak shape. Otherwise you get these bids which are "technically not forcing but virtually never passed" in which case it seems generally better to just play them as forcing (they weren't getting passed much anyway, and playing them forcing helps you bid the stronger hands).

There are some NFBs that everyone plays

 

1NT - (2♥) - 2♠

 

3♠ is GF so this has to cover a wide range. Lebensohl might help but maybe not, since it presumably means bidding 3♠ invitational at some stage on a 5-card suit.

So 2♠ ranges from competitive to mildly invitational. Tough, so we all tend to force to game on the strong invites to take the strain off. Likewise

 

1NT - (2♠) - 3♥ ?

 

Either this sequence or the one via Lebensohl/Rubensohl is non-forcing, easy to miss a perfect game. That's bridge, pay out to the overcall.

 

With NFBs after a suit opening, double then a new suit is forcing, virtually GF so strong invites need to jump one way or the other.

 

With KQxxxx, xx, Jxx, xx

 

it's important to act after

 

1♥ - (2♣) - ?

 

If you pass, opener will be deterred by his lack of spades. If 2♠ is forcing, you face a tough call next time if you have to double now. What will you do over 3♦ by partner? Will you remove 3NT to 4♠ ?

 

It's true that you also bid 2♠ non forcing with ♦A instead of ♦Jbut that might turn out well. You will often get another go.

[bill1157]

Negative free bids have never worked all that well for me. The issue is, say we have some auction like:

 

1♥ - (2♣) - 2♠*

 

*Negative free bid; non-forcing

 

The question is what opener should have to pass. If 2♠ can include anything less than game-forcing values, it seems like opener needs to bid again even with very mild extras regardless of fit (and should also bid again with a good fit for spades). But this means opener is rarely passing, and seems to hang responder when 2♠ was bid on a pretty weak hand.

 

On the other hand, if 2♠ is truly a weak hand and opener should almost always pass without a big fit or freak distribution, then what exactly are you doing with the invites? It seems like packing both invitational and game-forcing spade hands into the double will be problematic.

 

Honestly I have this problem with virtually all non-forcing bids. Obviously you have to play some non-forcing bids or you can never stop bidding! But it seems like you want one of: non-forcing bid has a fairly narrow range so partner can always evaluate whether to pass; or non-forcing bid denies the strength for game on values despite a wide range, so partner passes without a big fit or freak shape. Otherwise you get these bids which are "technically not forcing but virtually never passed" in which case it seems generally better to just play them as forcing (they weren't getting passed much anyway, and playing them forcing helps you bid the stronger hands).

There are some NFBs that everyone plays

 

1NT - (2♥) - 2♠

 

3♠ is GF so this has to cover a wide range. Lebensohl might help but maybe not, since it presumably means bidding 3♠ invitational at some stage on a 5-card suit.

So 2♠ ranges from competitive to mildly invitational. Tough, so we all tend to force to game on the strong invites to take the strain off. Likewise

 

1NT - (2♠) - 3♥ ?

 

Either this sequence or the one via Lebensohl/Rubensohl is non-forcing, easy to miss a perfect game. That's bridge, pay out to the overcall.

 

With NFBs after a suit opening, double then a new suit is forcing, virtually GF so strong invites need to jump one way or the other.

 

With KQxxxx, xx, Jxx, xx

 

it's important to act after

 

1♥ - (2♣) - ?

 

If you pass, opener will be deterred by his lack of spades. If 2♠ is forcing, you face a tough call next time if you have to double now. What will you do over 3♦ by partner? Will you remove 3NT to 4♠ ?

 

It's true that you also bid 2♠ non forcing with ♦A instead of ♦Jbut that might turn out well. You will often get another go.

really nice explanation!

 

thanks, Bill