What to do?

[ArtK78]

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sxxxh98xxdxckjxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

1♦ - 1♥

2♠ - ?[/hv]

 

You are South.

 

1) Do you agree with 1♥?

2) What do you do over 2♠?

[655321]

1) Agree with 1♥

2) Pass. Apologize if we missed a game, but we would have missed game by passing 1♦ too.

[Finch]

i) No I would have passed 1D

ii) Bid 2NT. For me, 3♣ is fourth suit forcing, and I definitely have clubs stopped.

 

If I had a response systemically in my methods, and partner game forces, I don't then pass him out in 2S.

[Guest Jlall]

It's close to a pass but this hand is (just) strong enough that I'm willing to bid 2N. If it was xxx xxxx x QJxxx I would pass.

[Apollo81]

Agree/2NT. A good partner will then bid 3♠.

[pclayton]

I'm fine with 3♣. I'm not passing, even though it might be right.

[nige1]

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sxxxh98xxdxckjxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

1♦ - 1♥

2♠ - ??

You are South.

1)  Do you agree with 1♥?

2)  What do you do over 2♠?[/hv]

IMO

• _P = 10, 1♥ = 7.
  
• Now, _P = 10, 3N=7, 2N = 6.
  For me 3♣ is 4th suit either asking for a stop or showing a good hand.
  Edited after reading Olebergs post about fast arrival.
  

[mike777]

I would have passed 1d but it was close.

 

Given that we are vul, I have no 5 card major or other nice distributional features I pass.

 

Now I guess 2nt is forced, hate to pass 2s.

[kenrexford]

2NT for me.

 

I hate bidding to keep the auction open in case partner has a powerful hand and then passing when it turns out that he has a powerful hand.

[ArtK78]

A number of posters passed the 2♠ rebid.

 

Are you aware that 2♠ is forcing? And, while extremely unlikely, could conceivably be made on a 3 card suit?

[mikeh]

I also would have passed: switch the round suits, and 1♥ is clear (to me, anyway).

 

Having scraped up a response, my choices seem to be a partnership violation of pass aor 2N, hoping to hear 3♣ (my view of ingberman or lebensohl here, and the two coincide on this auction, is that opener rebids 3♣ unless he cannot stand being passed there.. this hand type is a possibility)... if he rebids 3♦, well, we're not down yet.. and if he rebids 3♠... hmmmm.. I have to raise altho this may be a no-play game.....

 

I opt for 2N, since AKQxx x AKQxxx is possible, and the system violation is just too much to stomach... I'd consider passing only at mps.

[OleBerg]

Agree with 1♥, if I have an understanding partner. (I do.)

 

Some number of nt, whichever shows the worst hand, or at least a hand that sees no alternatives to 3nt as the final contract.

 

In my agreements it would be 3nt, as partner has gameforced.

 

If partner is 6-5 he should bid again.

 

 

Incidently, this hand is almost like the one from Michael Rosenbergs book. "Bridge, Zia and me", where he argues that passing a forcing bid is unethical.

 

I, and a few other guys, agree.

[Guest Jlall]

Incidently, this hand is almost like the one from Michael Rosenbergs book. "Bridge, Zia and me", where he argues that passing a forcing bid is unethical.

lol, serious question, is english your native language? I think you don't understand what the word "unethical" means, or what Rosenberg was talking about, or what anyone else has said (since no one has argued that it's unethical, just bad bridge).

[Guest Jlall]

I also would have passed: switch the round suits, and 1♥ is clear (to me, anyway).

 

Having scraped up a response, my choices seem to be a partnership violation of pass aor 2N, hoping to hear 3♣ (my view of ingberman or lebensohl here, and the two coincide on this auction, is that opener rebids 3♣ unless he cannot stand being passed there.. this hand type is a possibility)... if he rebids 3♦, well, we're not down yet.. and if he rebids 3♠... hmmmm.. I have to raise altho this may be a no-play game.....

 

I opt for 2N, since AKQxx x AKQxxx is possible, and the system violation is just too much to stomach... I'd consider passing only at mps.

This seems inconsistent. You're willing to pass 1D when partner might have AKQxx x AKQxxx x but you're not willing to pass 2S because he might have that hand. Aren't you risking playing partscore in both cases?

 

For those who don't think it can ever be right to respond and then pass the jump shift, I really disagree strongly.

 

When you respond you can be gambling on finding a fit in the suit you bid, or a different second suit, in which case you can have game. You are also hoping it's the opponents hand and you interfere with their bidding, and you are also hoping to find a better partial.

 

I really do not understand the people who were willing to pass 1D never being willing to pass a 2S JS. In both cases you're risking playing a partial when partner has game in hand. At least in the latter case we know we don't have a big fit anywhere (which is our primary chance for game), and we have gotten to a probably better partial.

 

I think this is a bad example of what I'm talking about since it is too strong, but what do people do with xxx Qxxxx --- xxxxx?

[mikeh]

A number of posters passed the 2♠ rebid.

 

Are you aware that 2♠ is forcing? And, while extremely unlikely, could conceivably be made on a 3 card suit?

I can't think of a hand that would jumpshift into a 3 card spade suit: responder has not denied 4 spades, so this jumpshift may deprive opener of control of the auction. He would/should jumpshift into a short club suit rather than a short major in these circumstances.

[Stephen Tu]

lol, serious question, is english your native language? I think you don't understand what the word "unethical" means, or what Rosenberg was talking about, or what anyone else has said (since no one has argued that it's unethical, just bad bridge).

 

Rosenberg's argument was that those who sometimes choose to pass their partner's "forcing" bids often do so acting either subconsciously or consciously based on partner's hitches (whether micro-hitch or more substantial). So they get better results more often than they "should", absent the UI, e.g. they somehow stay low in the misfit but scrape up another bid when partner jump-shifted with a fit in responder's suit or the like.

 

And if they choose not to pass on a hand and it works out well, it's hard to argue that they should pass to be consistent, that bidding on was suggested by UI, since the bid was forcing!

 

So his claim is that the ethical way to behave is to always respect the force even if you stretched before.

 

Your opinion may vary.

[ArtK78]

I realize that a jump shift on a 3 card major would be exceedingly rare, but how about this hand:

 

AKQ xx AKQJxx xx?

 

How would you bid these cards?

 

By the way, when I made my comment about the 2♠ jump shift rebid being forcing, I meant GAME forcing.

 

Also, the suggested example of a hand where one might jump shift into a 3 card major suit is not the strong hand opposite the problem hand in this thread.

[Guest Jlall]

I realize that a jump shift on a 3 card major would be exceedingly rare, but how about this hand:

 

AKQ xx AKQJxx xx?

 

How would you bid these cards?

 

By the way, when I made my comment about the 2♠ jump shift rebid being forcing, I meant GAME forcing.

 

Also, the suggested example of a hand where one might jump shift into a 3 card major suit is not the strong hand opposite the problem hand in this thread.

Yes, everyone knows that 2S is a FORCING bid.

 

Are you aware that partner is limited by his failure to open 2C, and 2S is only forcing because logically if one guy has shown a good 18-21 and the other guy has shown 6+ you are in a GF? However, when you have bid with much less than that over partner's NON forcing opener, you can logically choose to later pass partner's LIMITED bid if it is the best shot you have to get a plus score. For every hand that partner has 3262 and the nuts, he has far more 4?5? 18-21 hands.

 

By the way, 2S might make opposite your example hand, and 3N has almost no legitimate play.

[mikeh]

This seems inconsistent. You're willing to pass 1D when partner might have AKQxx x AKQxxx x but you're not willing to pass 2S because he might have that hand. Aren't you risking playing partscore in both cases?

 

Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds :)

 

I don't think it is inconsistent, in fact. There must be some hands that even you would pass as responder to a 1-level opening bid (otherwise I hope that you are alerting that all 1-level opening bids are forcing one round). And I suspect that you would agree that it is possible to construct hands for opener on which you can make game opposite some of these passing hands... such occurences will be few, and often the opps will be more or less forced to save you, since they will have some strength and shape of their own.

 

I would pass 1♦ because the odds of his having AKQxx x AKQxxx x or similar are low enough that I will pay to that combo in exchange for not getting way too high opposite, say, AJx Kxx AKJxxx x.. where he is bidding 3♦ over my 1♥... or AQx AJxx KQJxx x where he is splintering opposite my 1♥ and so on.

 

Having decided to respond, I honour the force, because, while I don't like my situation, I got myself into it by responding and it would be inconsistent to pass.

 

If my hand was worth a response, partner has said his hand is worth a game... it is passing the js that is inconsistent. I confess I added to the confusion by coming up with an example where pass of 2♠ was wrong, but I didn't really mean to say that I was bidding because of that hand-type.. I was bidding to honour the partnership agreement.

[Halo]

I think it is fairly simple.

 

If you can respond to an NF opening on near zero to improve the contract, then you can pass the rebid.

 

Otherwise you pass the opener and hope oppos rescue you (as they do more often these days).

[ArtK78]

Question to the Forum:

 

There is a difference between 1♦ - 1♠ - 2♥ and 1♦ - 1♥ - 2♠. Many play Lebensohl or Ingberman or some other method to sign off after a reverse with an unsuitable hand. Theoretically, the jump shift is game forcing. Do players have special Lebensohl"ish" methods or other methods after a 2 level jump shift rebid by opener? And if you do, why?

 

[by the way, I am fascinated by the number of forum members who advocate passing the "game-forcing" jump shift. Some are getting downright indignant about it as the right action]

[Guest Jlall]

Having decided to respond, I honour the force, because, while I don't like my situation, I got myself into it by responding and it would be inconsistent to pass.

I don't understand this part though. Why not make the partnership agreement that you will make the bids that will most likely lead to you getting a good score?

 

Again to me it is perfectly possible to construct hands where

 

A ) It is right to bid over the opener with less than 6 HCP (possibly far less), even if partner bids according to you having some values for a response (because you might find a good fit enabling you to make game, you might steal, you might find a better partial) and then

 

B ) It is right to pass the jumpshift because you rate to go down very very often if you bid, and even if there are some hands where game makes (I'm sure there always are), on all normal jumpshift hands, even with maximum HCP, you will go down if you keep bidding, and have a decent chance of going plus if you pass.

 

On these hands I will not pass in A or bid in B simply to honor the force or agreements. In fact I would consider it irrational to do so. I totally understand if people think that A or B are impossible (though I disagree), but I just can't understand believing that A and B are possible and still not bidding accordingly.

 

It's pretty funny that this hand came up because the other day at the club I had this exact auction and passed and my partner was quite mad at me until she opened the traveller (and everyone was in 1D making 110 and she made 140).

[Guest Jlall]

BTW, I think all of this would be different if partner was not limited, like I would not pass a 2C opener ever, but not to "honor the force" just because I think it doesn't rate to ever get me the best possible score in the long run since partner has announced a GFing hand (or close to it).

 

If we were to think in terms of what partner has shown, rather than NF or F then I think it would be easier for people to come to grips with passing in this auction sometimes if they could ever respond (very) light. For instance given a problem like this:

 

"You have 3 points and 3415 distribution, no honors in partners suits, and no controls. Your partner opens 1D, you bid 1H, partner bids 2S. Partner's 2S bid shows 4S, 5+D (or 5S 6+D) and denies 4 hearts and shows 18-21 HCP. 2 % of the time it may contain 3S and 6+D. It will typically deny a GF opposite a 0 count, the exception being a strong 2 suiter. What do you bid?"

 

I think that someone who's mind has not been trained in a forcing/non forcing/partnership harmony type of way would have no problem coming up with a pass given that problem, but it is really the same problem worded differently.

[awm]

Perhaps one way to think about this is to go back to the reason you responded to partner's opening bid.

 

If you responded because you don't want to risk missing a game on values by passing then it's inconsistent to now pass partner's strongest action of jump shifting or reversing. In fact, beginners are often taught that the reason to respond to an opening is in order to not miss a game, and thus that they should pass with less than six high card points, and so forth.

 

However, there are other reasons to respond to an opening. These including improving the partscore, finding a possible light game based upon a super-fit and stealing from the opponents. It is worth noting that the issues here are much more critical with a shapely hand than a balanced one (with a balanced hand the suit partner opened is usually an acceptable partial, you are much less likely to have game without a lot of points, and "stealing" becomes dangerous since you may have no safe spot yourself and going down in 1NTX could be worse than their possible game). For this reason many good players will pass an opening bid with less than five or six points and a balanced hand but will bid on much less with a five-five hand or six-card major (or in Justin's case a five-card major :P).

 

Anyway, if your only reason for responding was one of the last three and partner jump shifts, you may well have succeeded in improving the partial, you know that you don't have a super-fit (partner didn't raise your suit), and stealing from the opponents is no longer a factor since partner has announced half the deck in his own hand. So passing the rebid becomes eminently reasonable.

[peachy]

My partnerships treat this as if it were a reverse (not a gameforcing jump like 1D-1H-3C) and our agreement about reverse auctions apply. I bid 2NT = lower of 2NT or 4th suit to show bad hand. Second choice is Pass, but I really don't like it.