Forcing Pass

[Little Kid]

All Red

 

1♥ - (2♣)- 4♥ - (Pass)

Pass-(5♣)-Pass-(Pass)

?

 

Forcing pass or not?

[kfay]

No! :P

 

Evidence: http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=39006 .... etc.

 

We never announced ownership. The caddies can't tell if this is a sac (not uber-obvious)... like none of the criteria have been filled.

[Jlall]

no

[gwnn]

No thanks.

[dake50]

Partner chose 4H not to turn on FP.

Did he not have Q, other forces to turn FP on?

Would partners miss this distinction in announcing H-fit? Then he has the helm.

[pooltuna]

All Red

 

1♥ - (2♣)- 4♥ - (Pass)

Pass-(5♣)-Pass-(Pass)

?

 

Forcing pass or not?

no 3♣ no FP seems sensible

[effervesce]

Pard would have needed to have bid 3♣, or 4♣ or some other strength showing bid before this would be a FP.

[andy_h]

FP is crazy

[nigel_k]

Arguably it would not be FP even if partner had bid 3♣.

[Free]

Why would pass be forcing? Partner didn't promisse any values...

[P_Marlowe]

Technical speaking - No.

 

Practical speaking yes.

 

Responder failed to create a FP situation, he could have bid 3C

instead of 4H.

One of the purposes of the 3C bid is besides starting a game try seq.

or a possible slam investigation seq., is, to make it clear, that the

hand belongs to us.

 

Anyway - either bidding 5H is fine or X, to help in the decision process,

I would prefer to have FP in the given seq. available.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[peachy]

Not FP. The game was not bid constructively. Even if responder went via 3C, he could still have just limit raise values, so FP again isn't *on*.

[Little Kid]

My partner said bidding a vulnerable game made it forcing pass. Am I correct in thinking that you need to show game-forcing values in order to establish a forcing pass auction?

[Cascade]

My partner said bidding a vulnerable game made it forcing pass. Am I correct in thinking that you need to show game-forcing values in order to establish a forcing pass auction?

Some play that - I don't.

[gwnn]

Arguably it would not be FP even if partner had bid 3♣.

I like to play FP then. Probably in a forum minority on this issue. Limit+ values and them on the 5 level is FP (even after a 2/1 in competition).

[effervesce]

Arguably it would not be FP even if partner had bid 3♣.

I like to play FP then. Probably in a forum minority on this issue. Limit+ values and them on the 5 level is FP (even after a 2/1 in competition).

ditto gwnn. FP for 5m over 4M when we cueraise.

[Phil]

My partner said bidding a vulnerable game made it forcing pass. Am I correct in thinking that you need to show game-forcing values in order to establish a forcing pass auction?

Let him go for -800 or -880 a few times and see if he still wants to play it as forcing.

 

Raises to game do not create a force. Cuebids, fitjumps, splinters, whatever - should, but some of these are dubious if we are NV.

[Fluffy]

effervesce is right IMO.

 

 

Phil: I don't play fit showing bids stablishing any force, is it standard?

[CSGibson]

No.

[Finch]

effervesce is right IMO.

 

 

Phil: I don't play fit showing bids stablishing any force, is it standard?

I don't play fit jumps as setting up a forcing pass above the level of our fit. The fit jumper can double to show extras.

 

More interesting question:

 

1H 3C (weak) 4H P

P 5C P

 

Should this be forcing?

Should it be forcing against weak players and not against strong players?

[mikeh]

This isn't a forcing pass in any partnership in which we have ever discussed the topic.

 

If partner wants to involve us in a high-level fp (perhaps he could anticipate his LHO bidding 5♣ even if he didn't expect it from his RHO), he had at least one trivial way of doing so: cue bid 3♣.

 

Generally speaking, I don't use vulnerability to determine fp or not: I use the strength of the auction.

 

If we have committed to game, in the sense of constructive bidding, then all passes are fp at all levels...we sometimes double making games or 5 level saves that come home, but that's the price we pay.

 

If we have established a force but to a level below game, then fp applies only in auctions that have not yet reached our level of force. Once they bid beyond our level of force, then either partner may bid (to show extra offence) or double (to show extra values, not purely offensive in nature) or pass (to show that they hold nothing extra).

 

The 4♥ call 'forced' to game, but not in a constructive fashion..it was a preempt and the fact that we were red makes it a stronger offensive hand than the dreck that it may have been based on at reverse vulnerabilities, but certainly doesn't announce ownership of the hand.

[jukmoi]

effervesce is right IMO.

 

 

Phil: I don't play fit showing bids stablishing any force, is it standard?

I don't play fit jumps as setting up a forcing pass above the level of our fit. The fit jumper can double to show extras.

 

More interesting question:

 

1H 3C (weak) 4H P

P 5C P

 

Should this be forcing?

Should it be forcing against weak players and not against strong players?

I think this is forcing aplying the rule that "when we bid vulnerable game passes are forcing". Where as 1♥-(2♣)-4♥-pass; pass is exception to the rule since 4♥ was clearly pre-emptive.

[OleBerg]

Arguably it would not be FP even if partner had bid 3♣.

I like to play FP then. Probably in a forum minority on this issue. Limit+ values and them on the 5 level is FP (even after a 2/1 in competition).

I play that too.

 

(I also play pass as forcing, when we are red vs white, have bid game, and no alternative route was available, like: 1♠ - (4♥) - 4♠)

[gszeszycki]

USing the logic that 4h is designed to get us to a contract with reasonable expectation of taking 10 tricks (and there was no X of 4h) (if 4h X we having another conversation) I think this is definitely a forcing pass situation no matter imps or MP. It is much more clear cut at IMPS where we make bids designed to keep us from geting slaughtered) at MP we merely trying to keep from getting a bottom (not as critical)

 

Unless LHO is insane (bidding a passable 2c with 11 clubs tricks) LHO is opting for a sac. We need to look at OUR hand and decide if they are going to be lucky and make 5c or not. Thus when 4h bidder passed 5c it is because they are SHORT in clubs and may be willing to bid on. An X does not mean they can suddenly set 5c so much as they have club losers and wish to warn you against competing unecessarily.

 

lets say 4h bidder holds QJx xxxxxx QJxx void a perfect hand to PASS 5c and let p decide with Kxx xxxxxx Kx xx X better to warn p against competing

 

there are undoutedly some grey areas but there are limits as to what we can accomplish with scientific bidding vs guesswork.

[Phil]

effervesce is right IMO.

 

 

Phil: I don't play fit showing bids stablishing any force, is it standard?

I don't play fit jumps as setting up a forcing pass above the level of our fit. The fit jumper can double to show extras.

I take it you don't play any vulnerability-based forcing passes then?

 

I don't either, but many do.