Forcing 1NT response to major

[Creeksider]

GIB card says a 1NT response to opener's 1 of a major is forcing, and I don't get the logic of this approach. Say my partner opens 1♠ and I have a singleton in that suit, 6 points in side suits. I don't want to pass because opener may have 20 points -- but I don't want to force my partner to the 2 level if he opened a minimum. What am I missing?

[Cascade]

GIB card says a 1NT response to opener's 1 of a major is forcing, and I don't get the logic of this approach. Say my partner opens 1♠ and I have a singleton in that suit, 6 points in side suits. I don't want to pass because opener may have 20 points -- but I don't want to force my partner to the 2 level if he opened a minimum. What am I missing?

nothing.

[the hog]

GIB card says a 1NT response to opener's 1 of a major is forcing, and I don't get the logic of this approach. Say my partner opens 1♠ and I have a singleton in that suit, 6 points in side suits. I don't want to pass because opener may have 20 points -- but I don't want to force my partner to the 2 level if he opened a minimum. What am I missing?

 

Well, you could find a better fit for one thing.

[Stephen Tu]

GIB card says a 1NT response to opener's 1 of a major is forcing, and I don't get the logic of this approach. Say my partner opens 1♠ and I have a singleton in that suit, 6 points in side suits. I don't want to pass because opener may have 20 points -- but I don't want to force my partner to the 2 level if he opened a minimum. What am I missing?

 

Logic behind playing a forcing NT:

(1) Making it forcing allows you to put some of the stronger invitational hands into the response. This increases the requirements for a 2/1 response, which most people play as a game force these days. Establishing a GF at a low level gives you more bidding options when you do actually have enough to make a 2/1 response. Without a forcing (or semi-forcing) NT response, you can't play such strong 2/1 responses.

 

(2) Although it is possible to construct hands where 1nt is the last making contract, it's not so common that you are losing significantly (at least in net total) from playing it as forcing. Since 1nt is merely an expression of range (6-12-, roughly, or 6-10 playing a NF 1nt), not of shape (responder can be quite unbalanced), there's no particular reason with a balanced opener to assume 1nt is really the best spot. If opener was balanced, and rebids some minor, this gives some chance for responder to get out in his weak long suit, which might make when 1nt fails. And if opener was unbalanced, he was bidding over a non-forcing NT anyway. Certainly there are some hands where you lose out playing a forcing NT, but there are plenty where you gain also, probably enough to net a win even before the benefits of the stronger 2/1 responses.

 

If your forcing NT response gets you to somewhere on the 2 level down, it's usually not that big a deal if 1nt was also down, or if the opponents could make something themselves.

[P_Marlowe]

<snip>

-- but I don't want to force my partner to the 2 level if he opened a minimum. What am I missing?

 

If he is unbal. he will bid his 2nd suit / or repeat the suit he opened on the 2 level anyway, so

unless he has a bal. min. opener, you dont force p to bid on the 2 level, he will do this anyway.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Free]

The idea is a result of playing 2/1 GF. When you bid a suit at 2-level over partner's 1M opening, you immediately make the auction GF. This makes it easier to bid to slams because opener doesn't have to jump to show extra strength. However, with invitational hands where you used to bid a 2/1 with, you have to do something else now. It's solved simply by putting these hands in 1NT. Because opener with 14HCP and 5332 would pass a normal 1NT response, the 1NT response was made forcing to avoid missing games with invites vs ~14HCP openers. Responder can still show his invite with his second bid (2NT for example), or stay low with less than an invite (2M on a doubleton, pass, or your own suit).

[Creeksider]

Great responses, thanks.

[mikestar13]

The idea is a result of playing 2/1 GF. <snip>

This is historically incorrect, as the forcing NT predates 2/1 GF. Both Kaplan-Sheinwold and Roth-Stone had 2/1 not game forcing, although their requirement were elevated compared to standard.

[blackshoe]

There's (at least) two ways to look at it: if you play that a 2/1 response to 1M is GF, then you need some way to show non-GF hands with which you wish to respond. 1NT is about the only bid available for that, so you make it forcing and go from there. The other way is to say that if you play 1NT as forcing, then you can make your 2/1 bids GF (although, as Mikestar13 points out, you don't have to).

[MickyB]

It depends on how you play your other responses [most noticeably your jump-shifts], but the 1NT response will include some or all of the following -

 

1 - A natural 2NT bid, 11 points or so. If a 5332 14-count passed this you rate to miss a good 3NT.

2 - Invitational hands with a long suit. A suitable 5332 12-count will make game cold.

3 - Invitational hands with three-card support. A 5332 14-count may well miss game by passing, while a 5332 12-count will play 1NT instead of 3M [admittedly, if responder is balanced that rates to be fine].

4 - Weak hands with three-card support, too weak to raise to 2M immediately. They would rather play 2M than 1NT.

5 - Weak hands with a long suit. They are intending to bid at their next turn.

 

Obviously they are hands which would much rather have played 1NT than a suit contract, and hands that will be left with no course of action that will guarantee playing in a seven-card fit, so it isn't all one-sided. My preference is to try to remove some of types 2 and 3 from the 1NT response, and to play it as semi-forcing - i.e. you rebid a short minor on a balanced 14-count but pass 1NT with a balanced 12-count. This lets you play 1NT instead of 2NT opposite type 1.

[mgoetze]

It depends on how you play your other responses [most noticeably your jump-shifts], but the 1NT response will include some or all of the following -

 

1 - A natural 2NT bid, 11 points or so. If a 5332 14-count passed this you rate to miss a good 3NT.

2 - Invitational hands with a long suit. A suitable 5332 12-count will make game cold.

3 - Invitational hands with three-card support. A 5332 14-count may well miss game by passing, while a 5332 12-count will play 1NT instead of 3M [admittedly, if responder is balanced that rates to be fine].

4 - Weak hands with three-card support, too weak to raise to 2M immediately. They would rather play 2M than 1NT.

5 - Weak hands with a long suit. They are intending to bid at their next turn.

 

Obviously they are hands which would much rather have played 1NT than a suit contract, and hands that will be left with no course of action that will guarantee playing in a seven-card fit, so it isn't all one-sided. My preference is to try to remove some of types 2 and 3 from the 1NT response, and to play it as semi-forcing - i.e. you rebid a short minor on a balanced 14-count but pass 1NT with a balanced 12-count. This lets you play 1NT instead of 2NT opposite type 1.

 

Right - I like to remove type 2 (to jump shifts) and 3 (to 2♣), don't believe in the existence of type 4, and open 1NT with a balanced 14. Semiforcing 1NT then works great. ;)