When is forcing pass crucial

[bluecalm]

I am completing system notes right now and I am taking on forcing pass topic.

In general we play that pass isn't forcing too often. I would like to write down general rules to recognize situations where it is forcing.

 

My question: In what situations do you consider forcing pass to be absolutely crucial or at least very usefl.

So far I came up with:

 

1)If we forced to game below game, examples:

-2/1 sequencies

-2nd relay

-strong club and positive response

 

2)some strong club auctions which I don't like to go into in this thread (as this the whole other topic not interesting for many people)

 

3)When we are vul they are not and they take obvious sacrifice, example:

 

1NT - pass - 2♦ - 4♠

pass = forcing

 

1♦ - pass - 1♠ - 5♥

pass = forcing

 

4)When we double 1NT opening (weak or strong as we play penalty dbl vs strong) and they bid 2♣/2♦

 

1NT - dbl - 2♣/2♦ - pass = forcing

1Nt - dbl - 2♥/2♠ - pass = not forcing

 

That's about it.

 

Here some sequencies I am not sure about:

 

1)

1♥ - 5♣ - pass = ?

 

2)

1♥ - pass - 2♥ pass

4♥ - 5♦ - pass ? (it really did come up !)

 

3)

1♠ - 2♣ - dbl - 5♣

pass = ?

 

All comments are welcome B)

[aguahombre]

Again, someone good at these things could find the thread about 2 months ago, where lots of people gave their opinions about when a forcing pass is in effect, and when it isn't.

 

If Gwnn or another would be so kind as to link it here?

[gwnn]

I promise my favourite agreements are far from optimal but here is my opinion.

My question: In what situations do you consider forcing pass to be absolutely crucial or at least very usefl.

When we have forced to game or when we invited game and they're at the 5 level.

So far I came up with:

 

1)If we forced to game below game, examples:

-2/1 sequencies

-2nd relay

-strong club and positive response

Disagree with 2nd relay assuming you mean opener showed 19+.

2)some strong club auctions which I don't like to go into in this thread (as this the whole other topic not interesting for many people)

OK:)

 

3)When we are vul they are not and they take obvious sacrifice, example:

I don't like the sound of it...

1NT - pass - 2♦ - 4♠

pass = forcing

Non-forcing

 

1♦ - pass - 1♠ - 5♥

pass = forcing

Non-forcing, but I guess this is incredibly rare so you can play whatever you like.

 

4)When we double 1NT opening (weak or strong as we play penalty dbl vs strong) and they bid 2♣/2♦

 

1NT - dbl - 2♣/2♦ - pass = forcing

1Nt - dbl - 2♥/2♠ - pass = not forcing

I played all these as forcing (even over 2♥ in fact) but I am not sure I like it. awm had a nice rule that if your partner can have 0 points, it's non forcing. I like that idea. That said, these situations are very hard.

 

That's about it.

 

Here some sequencies I am not sure about:

 

1)

1♥ - 5♣ - pass = ?

Clearly non-forcing

 

2)

1♥ - pass - 2♥ pass

4♥ - 5♦ - pass ? (it really did come up !)

Non-forcing, the 2♥ bidder is limited, who is he to force opener?

 

3)

1♠ - 2♣ - dbl - 5♣

pass = ?

Non-forcing, because to me the double does not show significantly more than a 1 level response. Anyway if you want to play forcing passes over 1d-p-1s-(5H), you should do the same here even though neither really makes sense to me!

 

All comments are welcome :)

[inquiry]

When you need it to be forcing... :)

[gnasher]

1♥ - pass - 2♥ pass

4♥ - 5♦ - pass ? (it really did come up !)

 

Non-forcing, the 2♥ bidder is limited, who is he to force opener?

Responder can (and probably should) still bid as though it's a forcing pass situation. That is, double is discouraging and pass is encouraging.

 

That applies to any sequence where the sound of the auction suggests that pass should be forcing, but a limited hand is first to act. This is a slightly more common example:

  1♥ pass 2♥ 2♠

  3♦ pass 4♥ pass

  pass 4♠

[peachy]

Even world class experts don't agree amongst themselves about what agreements should be in place regarding Forcing Pass.

Here is a good discussion about the topic:

http://www.districtsix.org/Articles/Article%202009-06.aspx

[nigel_k]

Even world class experts don't agree amongst themselves about what agreements should be in place regarding Forcing Pass.

Here is a good discussion about the topic:

http://www.districtsix.org/Articles/Article%202009-06.aspx

I like the waiter/janitor rule.

[awm]

My tendency is to define as few passes forcing as possible.

 

One observation is that misunderstandings about forcing pass in low-level auctions are expensive because the forcing pass inverts the meaning of double and pass (i.e. usually at the two-level double is takeout, but if you are in a forcing pass then double is penalty and pass is "takeout"). So it's very important to be on the same page as to whether pass is forcing in these sequences. My own tendency is to play doubles as takeout even if we are in a force, which eliminates the possibility for costly misunderstandings (pass asks partner to double unless he wouldn't sit for a penalty double) and then define as few sequences as forcing as possible. Certainly the various auctions where one partner has shown a good hand and the other could have nothing (like 1NT-X-runout or 1N-P-transfer-4♠) are not forcing to me.

 

In higher level auctions, most of the time it's clear who is sacrificing and that defending undoubled is simply not logical, and the meanings of the calls are basically the same in any case (double is penalty, pass says I don't know what to do) so even a misunderstanding about forcing pass rarely costs unless you had the "pass and pull" slam try. In many of the auctions listed here, slam try is pretty unlikely (like opener after 1m-P-1♠-5♥ or responder after 1♥-P-2♥-P-4♥-5♦) so it arguably hardly matters if you even have an agreement about whether pass is forcing. Again, my rule is "if you haven't shown GF on values, it's not forcing."

[bluecalm]

My own tendency is to play doubles as takeout even if we are in a force

 

Yeah, we play the same way. I suspect it will be standard soon.

 

Thanks for the answers. I try to have as few forcing passes as possible but answers so far tells me that I can have even less than now :D

[bucky]

3)When we are vul they are not and they take obvious sacrifice, example:

 

1NT - pass - 2♦ - 4♠

pass = forcing

 

1♦ - pass - 1♠ - 5♥

pass = forcing

I don't quite understand why those two sequences (especially first one) is obvious sacrifice. The 2♦ transfer doesn't show any value, and 4♠ can just be bid to make. Unless, of course, you use 2♦ as some sort of forcing stayman...