More on forcing passes

[Phil]

You are dealt your usual:

 

♠xxxxx ♥xxx ♦Jxxx ♣x

 

r/w, matchpoints if it matters.

 

(2♥) - dbl - (pass) - 2♠;

(pass) - 4♠ - (5♥) - pass;

(pass) - dbl - (pass)

 

See poll...

[bluecalm]

I would bid 5S round before. Getting another chance I bid 5s now regardless of what dbl means.

I think our first pass is non-forcing we can have 0 an they could be trapping. I live by the rule that if we didn't force ourselves to game below game then pass is NF barring specific agreements.

Now partner has to double with many powerhouses regardless of his actual H holding and 5S is often making. I really consider it a no-brainer. We have huge extras which we didn't show before.

[Codo]

The problem with pass and 5 ♠ is that many will take it as Slam interesst, something I do not find in my hand despite the nice distribution.

[nigel_k]

Not forcing, but I play fewer forcing passes than most people. RHO is unlimited so it is not an 'obvious sacrifice' situation. Also, partner could have bid 3♥ to unequivocally create a force. I would pass now.

 

If playing with a random expert, I would have no idea but would probably guess that it's forcing.

[Finch]

I play fewer forcing passes than most people, but this one is definitely forcing. Partner volunteered 4S opposite a hand that has nothing. He's shown a powerhouse.

It's a slightly odd auction: how can he have enough to bid 4S but not enough to investigate slam?

 

I would have bid 5S directly over 5H, because if it's a forcing pass then pass-then-pull would show a stronger hand.

[mikeh]

Definitely a forcing pass.

 

I don't share Frances' concerns about partner's 4♠, rather than, say, 3♥ as a slam try. I have limited my hand to less than invitational, so there are hands on which it would be clear to partner that slam is out of reach (or too dangerous to explore), yet on which game is good. I don't need to argue that there will be many such....the fact (which I think is undeniable) that some exist means that his call is not at all strange.

 

The important point is that partner, knowing I have less than invitational values and in a non-competitive auction (at the point of his 4♠ bid) committed us to game. This was clearly a power bid and thus established a fp.

 

With that in mind, I would have bid 5♠ over 5♥, since I am old-fashioned and play that pass and pull shows extras.

 

There is an argument that in this specific type of auction, in which the strong hand has expressly denied slam interest, pass and pull shouldn't carry that meaning....after all, we presumably knew that we had no slam interest before they saved, so how can we have such interest now...especially when it is the hand short in hearts that denied the interest?

 

However, my belief is that except in the most highly-attuned partnerships, it is best to stick to fairly generic rules even if doing so is arguably sub-optimal, so long as the rules don't create a major problem. They don't, here. Pass and pull, showing extras, can't hurt since it ought to be impossible for partner to bid slam anyway.

 

That thought gives me some relief, that I will probably escape the consequences of my horrible pass over 5♥.

[bluecalm]

This was clearly a power bid and thus established a fp.

 

My problem with this is that it's difficult to construct a generic rule which would allow us to recognize such situations without agreeing on all of them separately.

Can you propose a rule which qualifies this 4S as power bid and also work for other similar situations ?

 

Let's say this sequence:

1C - dbl - pass - 1H

2S - 4H - 4S - ?

 

Is 4H a "power bid" here and thus pass now forcing ?

[mikeh]

My problem with this is that it's difficult to construct a generic rule which would allow us to recognize such situations without agreeing on all of them separately.

Can you propose a rule which qualifies this 4S as power bid and also work for other similar situations ?

 

Let's say this sequence:

1C - dbl - pass - 1H

2S - 4H - 4S - ?

 

Is 4H a "power bid" here and thus pass now forcing ?

let me know when that auction arises...partner makes a takeout double without spades? And doesn't have a good hand?

[bluecalm]

He may have very good hand with hearts without spades, too strong for 1H overcall.

[lalldonn]

I do not think our pass was forcing. We showed nothing and partner can easily have less than half the deck if he has a big fit. The pass by RHO over 2♥X doesn't show weakness either, as though it may be strategically bad to pass instead of raising he still had a free option to do so on any hand.

[Phil]

This hand was given to me.

 

My regular partner thinks pass is forcing. I'm not so sure. There are spade heavy doubles that love the 2♠ call. Probably not six spades since 3♠ is available but 5431 or 5440 sound quite plausible.

 

My first reaction was 5♠ after the double. I've seen so many hands where RHO had every intent of bidding 5♥ if necessary and they usually have four trump and spade shortness.

 

However the club shortness screams for defending too. Tough problem I thought.

 

Partner actually held AKQTx x Kxx AKxx. 5♠ is too high and you get 5♥ 500 I believe. Even if you shift the club ace to diamonds 5♠ is still s stretch.

[MrAce]

1- NF, i agree with Josh, also pd had available space and bids to create a forc pass auction, with the hands that pd is expected to hold he had better bids than just 4♠ imo.

 

2- b

 

3- This is the tuff part, i wish i could say that i would pass easily, i might but not sure what i would do at the table honestly.

[mikeh]

1- NF, i agree with Josh, also pd had available space and bids to create a forc pass auction, with the hands that pd is expected to hold he had better bids than just 4♠ imo.

 

What forcing bids did he have between 2♠ and 4♠? You said 'bids' yet the only forcing calls he has are the single cue and the jump cue. The jump cue should have a specific, precise meaning....presumably either shortness (stiff or void) or void....as well as agreeing spades and showing slam interest.

 

The single cue says nothing about a spade fit: it is a generic force....for example, if we bid 3♠ and he bids 4m, that is natural and forcing, while a jump to 4m over 2♠ is natural and very strong, but not forcing (imo).

 

A single cue followed by a spade raise would be a slam try.

 

So when he has no slam interest opposite a maximum 2♠, but fits spades and thinks game is worth bidding, he has to bid it. I suspect that such hands will usually hold 5 spades as well as a very good hand. The actual hand falls within that sort of layout...which makes my choice of bidding wrong, but in fact (imo) validates my argument on what a bid means....in particular that it establishes a fp.

[phil_20686]

My agreements are that whenever we bid a game `constructively' at red vs green, this creates a FP at the five level. (though not necessarily the four level).

 

This sequence looks `constructive' to me.

 

So I would pass, and then pass.

[Fluffy]

I would had bet all I have that Frances didn't play this one forcing. I saved a lot by not betting :P

 

Partner's failure to cuebid means no forcing pass is avaible for me.

 

More so, our hand is better than it could be, but not better than expected (or not much), club singleton might or migh be not good, and 5th spade can also be useless, partner is not playing for us to have a 3433 yarborough, he thinks we have something on average. I don't find our hand good enough for 5♠.

[dake50]

Is it so rare that 5+level doubles suggest two losers in opponents suit

Or put another way no control in their suit?

I play FP ON. I won't suggest H-control with pass then bid.

I would have doubled 5H last round: "partner, I see no higher"