Free bid

[Antrax]

Brought up by this auction: (1♣)-X-(2♣)-3♥. "What is 3♥? -Shows extra strength". So partner and I understood each other (3♥ had an 11-count) but after the game it was brought to our attention that's not "how you play". So, assuming we're not playing NFB, which of the following are forcing and how many beans can be expected for:

1. (1♣)-X-(2♣)-2♥

2. (1♣)-X-(2♣)-3♣

3. (1♣)-X-(1♠)-2♥

4. (1♣)-X-(1♥)-1♠

5. (1♣)-1♠-(2♣)-2♥

6. (1♣)-1♦-(2♣)-2♥

7. (1♣)-1♠-(2♣)-3♥

 

Thanks, and sorry for what seems like a very basic question.

[Flameous]

1. Constructive but nf, maybe something like 5-8 with 5 card suit and little more if you have to bid it with 4

2. GF with doubt about strain, either both majors or looking for club stopper

3. Same as 1.

4. Ditto

5. This is F1 without any agreements I think, though it makes lot of sense to play it as "NFB"

6. Same as 5.

7. If you have 2H as F1, you can use this for any special meaning, ie. fitjump. Playing 2H NF, this should be GF with good hearts.

 

I'm not sure, I might be off with some standard meaning but I know I'll be corrected here :)

[Antrax]

What you describe is exactly what I thought (and chided for by a world-class player).

[aguahombre]

I have a slightly different agreement about #2 from that of Flamous. Mine isn't G.F., but rather "pick the right major" and appropriate for the 3-level. Because it is not G.F., it can't be either-or (club stop) for us. Partner is allowed to bump to the four-level with her choice, and 3NT would be a NT hand too big for a direct overcall.

 

Regardless, I object to a WC or anyone else using "that's not how you play". What you play is exactly how you play; and if it works for you, fine. Might or might not be optimum, and perhaps he could explain why; but his dogmatic pronouncement would be a turnoff (in person, or in a forum).

[Antrax]

Our opponents told us that's not how to play. The WC was quite adamant that all game-forcing responses to TO double should start with a cue bid, and that a free-bid at the 2-level shows at least a good 9.

[aguahombre]

Our opponents told us that's not how to play. The WC was quite adamant that all game-forcing responses to TO double should start with a cue bid, and that a free-bid at the 2-level shows at least a good 9.

I see nothing in what you bid at the table which goes against "all-game-forcing responses should start with a cue bid"....nor is there anything in Flameous' post contrary to that. "All g.f. start with cuebid" is not the same as "all cuebids are game-force".

 

Even so, I bet the WC has jumped directly to 4M sometime in his life. Last I looked, 4M is game, and was not a cuebid.

[Antrax]

Yeah. Specifically about that auction, 3♥ should be something like a weak-2 in hearts, supposedly. Guessing a jump to 4H would be a weak 3? IDK.

[wank]

he's right about all GFs going through a cuebid, well, unless you just jump to game obviously.

 

it doesn't necessarly mean that the cue should be a GF, for example with more space available the cuebid can just be forcing to suit agreement if you like, for example, 1♣ - x - 1♦ - 2♣ allows a major to be bid (2M) and supported (3M) without committing to game.

 

on the other hand, the comment above about 1♣ - x - 2♣ - 3♣ not being GF is obviously erroneous as you could make a responsive double with fewer values.

 

one thing everyone should be able to agree on is that it's utter tosh to demand 9 points for a free bid at the 2 level. if it went 1♥ - X - 2♦ and I have KTxxx♠ and out, i'm not passing. the 'world class' opponent is probably confused by a jump to the 2-level.

[MrAce]

I do not understand that a free bid at 2 level shows at least 9 hcp kinda comments. This has nothing to do with NFB either(assuming u meant negative free bids) NFB apply after pd opens, not after pd DBLS, since the suit you bid here is a suit that is already implied by partner, not a self suit that can hit a stiff or void not even a doubleton unless pd has a giant.

 

Ax QTxxx xx xxxx i would bid 2♥ on anyday after 1♣-DBL-2♣

 

1♣-DBL-2♣-3♣ is % 100 gf to me.

 

I have a slightly different agreement about #2 from that of Flamous. Mine isn't G.F., but rather "pick the right major" and appropriate for the 3-level.

 

You have DBL card for this

[helene_t]

Our opponents told us that's not how to play. The WC was quite adamant that all game-forcing responses to TO double should start with a cue bid, and that a free-bid at the 2-level shows at least a good 9.

A freebid at the two-level usually refers to

1banana-(1or2oranges)-2apples

this shows indeed at least a good 9.

 

But the examples you give are different. A freebid oopposite a t/o double is typically 6-9.

 

In your first example, 3♥ is invitational. You bid correctly.

[kgr]

(1♣)-X-(2♣)-3♥. "What is 3♥? -Shows extra strength".

I wonder how this is played by expert partnerships.

I play it as weak (both if 2C is weak or Inverted)

With an invitational hand you can DBL followed by 3♥?

[gwnn]

It's not that simple kgr.

 

xx AQxxxx xxxx x is not the same hand as Kxx AQJx xxxx xx. It is not a good idea to bid the same way with both hands. The world is gray and it's not as simple as "invitational in hearts" and that is a box and there's only invitational hands in hearts in that box and whenever you double and bid 3♥ you have a hand from that box.

 

It pays to bid 3♥ on something like the first one (well maybe that one is starting to be a 4♥ bid already but yea you get my point I hope?) and double to try to look for a good strain on the second one.

[kgr]

It's not that simple kgr.

 

xx AQxxxx xxxx x is not the same hand as Kxx AQJx xxxx xx. It is not a good idea to bid the same way with both hands. The world is gray and it's not as simple as "invitational in hearts" and that is a box and there's only invitational hands in hearts in that box and whenever you double and bid 3♥ you have a hand from that box.

 

It pays to bid 3♥ on something like the first one (well maybe that one is starting to be a 4♥ bid already but yea you get my point I hope?) and double to try to look for a good strain on the second one.

I see.

But I wonder if it is best to be able to distinguish xx AQxxxx xxxx x and Kxx AQJx xxxx xx

or is it better to be able to preempt with:

xx Axxxxx xxxx x

xxx AJxxx xxxx x

...and what is most common for experts?

Thanks,

Koen

[gwnn]

Well the first one is not bad for an invitational 3♥ and the second one is fine for a 2♥ bid.

[BunnyGo]

Our opponents told us that's not how to play. The WC was quite adamant that all game-forcing responses to TO double should start with a cue bid, and that a free-bid at the 2-level shows at least a good 9.

 

Antrax, I agree with the above posters about the general meaning of these bids. That said, I've discovered here that "Israeli standard" is very far from "standard" as I've seen it anywhere else. This may have been confusing the issue, but I'm not sure.

[Antrax]

Is that something specific to Israel? I half-expected every country would have its quirks.

[gwnn]

But still kgr you must see that takeout doubler would like to know if you have 4 hearts or 5 hearts? Especially if he himself has only 3? but also if he has 4 then he is very happy to raise you if you showed 5 unless he has some horrible hand.

[helene_t]

Is that something specific to Israel?

Maybe not but it is confusing that they play clockwise even when writing the commentary in Hebrew :)

[aguahombre]

I have a slightly different agreement about #2 from that of Flamous. Mine isn't G.F., but rather "pick the right major" and appropriate for the 3-level.

 

You have DBL card for this

Yes, we have a DBL card for that, but our choice of whether to use it is different from your choice.

 

(1c) X (2C) X ....is obviously responsive, but with competive values for the 2-level. This might be important for partner to know if there is further competition.

 

(1c) X (2c) 3C....shows values appropriate for the 3-level or higher. This distinction might be important for partner to know, whether or not the opponents further compete.