An Auction

[kfay]

1H-1S

2C-2N

3D

[gwnn]

F 

[quiddity]

Why wouldn't this be natural and forcing with short spades? Worried about the stopper for notrump, asking if we might be better off in hearts, etc..

[gwnn]

I don't think 3♦ expresses anxiety. I think it's optimistic and is (mildly) interested in slam.

[rogerclee]

I think you need to be able to work out what to do with strong 5-5, weak 5-5, strong 6-4, and weak 6-4 on this auction, and strong 0544 is also important to be able to show if you can do it (but this hand is rarer since 0544 would usually have started 2D if strong and 2C if weak). How you do that is up to you, but playing 3D as naturalish is not one of the ways to accomplish this.

[awm]

Forcing. Not always 100% natural. Basically 3♦ says "we have game values, but I'm not sure 3NT is the best contract" and leaves it to partner to work out what to do from there. Of course, we can infer that opener is not 3514 (would bid 3♠ over 2NT) nor is opener very balanced (i.e. 2524 would just 3NT). The general theme is that opener is worried about a spade stopper and/or opener has a six-card heart suit and might want to play 4♥ opposite a doubleton if responder is not loaded in the pointy suits.

[Phil]

Forcing - pretty sure I posted this one (or something almost identical) 4-5 years ago. I remember Ben saying something like:

 

2♣ - non-forcing

2N - non-forcing

3♦ - logically forcing

 

I agreed with him then and now.

 

Gwnn the Historian - can you find?

[rogerclee]

Just two more things

 

1H-1S

2C-2N

??

 

One possible method in this auction is

 

3C = weak 5-5

3D = all heart hands, weak or strong

3H = strong 5-5

 

Also the auction

 

1H-1S

2D-2N

?

 

is very different due to the extra step. Now it makes sense to play 3C as showing weak catchall or strong 0544, and 3D/3H are forcing.

[jdonn]

Forcing. Not always 100% natural. Basically 3♦ says "we have game values, but I'm not sure 3NT is the best contract" and leaves it to partner to work out what to do from there. Of course, we can infer that opener is not 3514 (would bid 3♠ over 2NT) nor is opener very balanced (i.e. 2524 would just 3NT). The general theme is that opener is worried about a spade stopper and/or opener has a six-card heart suit and might want to play 4♥ opposite a doubleton if responder is not loaded in the pointy suits.

So in what way is that not 100% natural? And if opener has a 6 card heart suit and wants to offer a choice of games why didn't he bid 3♥ instead?

[aguahombre]

accepting game ---probably 1-5-3-4, suggesting we maybe belong in our 6-3 diamond fit. 2/1 auction. (2 diamonds the first time by responder not possible with only 11-12 points, maybe).

 

Similar, but not the same as, 1S-1NT-2m-2NT- 3H, which is semi automatic with a game acceptance and 3 hearts (2/1 auction where 5-card heart suit could never be mentioned by responder).

[awm]

The problem is that I'm not convinced 1♥-1♠-2♣-2N-3♥ should be forcing.

 

Certainly there is an old-fashioned style where minimum 6♥-4♣ hands are supposed to rebid 2♥ at second turn and then 3♣ at third turn, in which case the above sequence is stronger. But I don't think many people play this style now -- most seem to prefer to almost always rebid 2♣ in order to show nine cards of shape instead of six. Assuming most minimum 6♥-4♣ hands would rebid 2♣, it seems necessary to have a way to get out in 3♥ (which could easily be the best contract) -- perhaps even more essential since people open pretty light these days with 6-4 shape.

 

Assuming 1♥-1♠-2♣-2N-3♥ is NF, we need to bid 3♦ with patterns like 1624 and even 2614 in order to find the best game.

[aguahombre]

Yeh, I am old fashioned. but 6 hearts and 4 clubs was ten cards of shape even back then.

[jdonn]

Adam I think we play bridge on different planets, 3♥ forcing is still standard and much more commonly played than nf. If you want to cater to everything you should play something more like what roger showed anyway.

[awm]

Well, suppose we took a BBF poll of:

 

♠xx ♥KJ9xxx ♦x ♣AQxx

 

I expect that most would open 1♥ on this hand rather than 2♥ or pass. I also expect that most would rebid 2♣ on this hand after 1♥-P-1♠-P. Feel free to disagree on either of these points; we can actually take the poll if you want.

 

Assuming I'm right, what does this hand bid after 1♥-1♠-2♣-2NT? It really seems like passing could be a disaster; say partner has KJxx Qx Qxxx Kxx for example. You could easily lose the first 4-5 diamond tricks and a heart and 1-2 spades for down two, while 3♥ is really good and 4♥ has a bit of play. Even if the opponents lead a black suit it doesn't necessarily save 2NT.

 

I agree that in some sense 3♥ forcing is standard (it's certainly very old-fashioned standard) but I think the non-forcing treatment is a logical consequence of some very common modern stylistic choices (opening very light on 6-4 hands, rebidding four-card side suits rather than showing the sixth card in the suit opened). Just because not all modern players who adhere to these common modern stylistic treatments have yet realized the logical consequences don't mean they aren't logical consequences... :)

[jdonn]

Are we talking about what's a good idea or what's standard? I don't think the consequence must follow anyway, 3♥ can also be a disaster opposite your example hand if partner has a stiff heart so you are fine to take your chances passing 2NT. Game is really not likely to be good and even less likely to be cold.

[blackshoe]

It may well be that some pairs have illogical agreements - or no agreement at all.

[jdonn]

Btw even better than what roger said on this auction is something more like transfers by responder starting with 2♦. You could work out the details for yourself but it would be such that you would be able to stop in 2NT if responder has a singleton heart but 3♥ if he has a doubleton.

 

You might counter we could easily have this discussion after a 2♦ rebid instead but in that case play the transfers by opener after responder's 2NT rebid.

 

Transfers! ♥♥♥

[mike777]

100% forcing....any bid over 2nt is game forcing.....that means with some weakish hand you just pass 2nt.

[straube]

Well, suppose we took a BBF poll of:

 

♠xx ♥KJ9xxx ♦x ♣AQxx

 

I expect that most would open 1♥ on this hand rather than 2♥ or pass. I also expect that most would rebid 2♣ on this hand after 1♥-P-1♠-P. Feel free to disagree on either of these points; we can actually take the poll if you want.

 

Assuming I'm right, what does this hand bid after 1♥-1♠-2♣-2NT? It really seems like passing could be a disaster; say partner has KJxx Qx Qxxx Kxx for example. You could easily lose the first 4-5 diamond tricks and a heart and 1-2 spades for down two, while 3♥ is really good and 4♥ has a bit of play. Even if the opponents lead a black suit it doesn't necessarily save 2NT.

 

I agree that in some sense 3♥ forcing is standard (it's certainly very old-fashioned standard) but I think the non-forcing treatment is a logical consequence of some very common modern stylistic choices (opening very light on 6-4 hands, rebidding four-card side suits rather than showing the sixth card in the suit opened). Just because not all modern players who adhere to these common modern stylistic treatments have yet realized the logical consequences don't mean they aren't logical consequences... :)

Seems like this new style of bidding gets us up too high. If I'm playing a standard system, I still like 1H and a 2H rebid because it limits my hand. If I play a club system, I would rather open 1H and rebid 2C.

 

Over 1H-1S, 2C with KJxx Qx Qxxx Kxx I'll probably rebid 2H because this hand has soft values (the knr is 8.95) and I don't want to bid 2N unless I have a hand worth a bad 11.

 

Without agreement, I'd take 1H-1S, 2C-2N-3D as natural showing a 1-5-3-4 pattern with somewhere between 14 and 18 hcps. Forcing to 3N or 4m I would think.

[aguahombre]

any bid over 2nt is game forcing.....that means with some weakish you hand you just pass 2nt.

True, this is some (lots of) people's agreement. But also common is that the 3C rebid is not. This, IMO, is a lot more common and standard NF (3C), than 3H NF.

[kgr]

Well, suppose we took a BBF poll of:

 

♠xx ♥KJ9xxx ♦x ♣AQxx

 

I expect that most would open 1♥ on this hand rather than 2♥ or pass. I also expect that most would rebid 2♣ on this hand after 1♥-P-1♠-P. Feel free to disagree on either of these points; we can actually take the poll if you want.

 

Assuming I'm right, what does this hand bid after 1♥-1♠-2♣-2NT? It really seems like passing could be a disaster; say partner has KJxx Qx Qxxx Kxx for example. You could easily lose the first 4-5 diamond tricks and a heart and 1-2 spades for down two, while 3♥ is really good and 4♥ has a bit of play. Even if the opponents lead a black suit it doesn't necessarily save 2NT.

 

I agree that in some sense 3♥ forcing is standard (it's certainly very old-fashioned standard) but I think the non-forcing treatment is a logical consequence of some very common modern stylistic choices (opening very light on 6-4 hands, rebidding four-card side suits rather than showing the sixth card in the suit opened). Just because not all modern players who adhere to these common modern stylistic treatments have yet realized the logical consequences don't mean they aren't logical consequences... ;)

Seems like this new style of bidding gets us up too high. If I'm playing a standard system, I still like 1H and a 2H rebid because it limits my hand.

Agree. If I open 1♥ then I rebid 2♥.

 

Over 1H-1S, 2C with KJxx Qx Qxxx Kxx I'll probably rebid 2H because this hand has soft values (the knr is 8.95) and I don't want to bid 2N unless I have a hand worth a bad 11.

I would rebid 2NT with that hand. 2♥ shows a weaker hand and if we play NT then it is best played from my hand

Without agreement, I'd take 1H-1S, 2C-2N-3D as natural showing a 1-5-3-4 pattern with somewhere between 14 and 18 hcps.  Forcing to 3N or 4m I would think.

Still 4th suit GF for me, but we play 2♣ forcing.

[mikeh]

The problem is that I'm not convinced 1♥-1♠-2♣-2N-3♥ should be forcing.

 

Certainly there is an old-fashioned style where minimum 6♥-4♣ hands are supposed to rebid 2♥ at second turn and then 3♣ at third turn, in which case the above sequence is stronger. But I don't think many people play this style now -- most seem to prefer to almost always rebid 2♣ in order to show nine cards of shape instead of six. Assuming most minimum 6♥-4♣ hands would rebid 2♣, it seems necessary to have a way to get out in 3♥ (which could easily be the best contract) -- perhaps even more essential since people open pretty light these days with 6-4 shape.

 

Assuming 1♥-1♠-2♣-2N-3♥ is NF, we need to bid 3♦ with patterns like 1624 and even 2614 in order to find the best game.

with the super weak 6=4, I'd rebid 2♥. It may be old fashioned, but not everything that is old fashioned is obsolete. Sometimes the reason an old treatment is still current is because it is effective.

 

It used to be that the sequence H - C - H showed significant extras, and I don't go that far...but I like to be able to show a hand that would accept a 2N invite over 2C (Unless I rebid 3C, which is to play).

 

Major then clubs is the toughest sequence: all other sequences with responder rebidding 2N allow for opener to use transfers at the 3-level, which greatly increases flexibility.

[flytoox]

Well, suppose we took a BBF poll of:

 

♠xx ♥KJ9xxx ♦x ♣AQxx

 

I expect that most would open 1♥ on this hand rather than 2♥ or pass. I also expect that most would rebid 2♣ on this hand after 1♥-P-1♠-P. Feel free to disagree on either of these points; we can actually take the poll if you want.

 

Assuming I'm right, what does this hand bid after 1♥-1♠-2♣-2NT? It really seems like passing could be a disaster; say partner has KJxx Qx Qxxx Kxx for example. You could easily lose the first 4-5 diamond tricks and a heart and 1-2 spades for down two, while 3♥ is really good and 4♥ has a bit of play. Even if the opponents lead a black suit it doesn't necessarily save 2NT.

 

I agree that in some sense 3♥ forcing is standard (it's certainly very old-fashioned standard) but I think the non-forcing treatment is a logical consequence of some very common modern stylistic choices (opening very light on 6-4 hands, rebidding four-card side suits rather than showing the sixth card in the suit opened). Just because not all modern players who adhere to these common modern stylistic treatments have yet realized the logical consequences don't mean they aren't logical consequences... :P

With the hand you gave, isnt 2H the better rebid, rather than 2C? Rebidding 2C then bidding 3H shows better than min, I think.

[peachy]

What if responder has AQxx-x-Kxxxx-Jxx or 4-1-6-2, an invitational hand with five or six diamonds? That hand is a very common one in the posted auction.

 

I'm still listening what others say, but 1H-1S-2C-2NT-3H is definitely forcing because with a minimum opening and six hearts, opener would have rebid 2H instead of 2C, and with 5-5 he would bid 3C over 2NT. Right?

 

Should 3D by opener be forcing; and, what hand would it show - don't know.

[hijumper]

NF. First of all, both sides showed a limited hand by 2c and 2NT. 2NT iwas invitational and showed a hand with <6 S and <2H and stopper on d. 3D was not forcing but probably invitational because of limited 2C. 3D should show a 0544 hand and ask partner to decide where to go depending on what he had.