Forcing or not forcing question.

[Adam1105]

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1d1sp2cp]133|100[/hv]

 

Is West's bid forcing or not forcing?

 

Thank you very much.

[akwoo]

You have to agree this with your partner. I would estimate, in my neck of the woods, 70% play it as non forcing and 30% as forcing.

[mgoetze]

Nonforcing is quite popular here in Germany, too. I myself prefer forcing and would also recommend that to beginners, as it's easier.

[aguahombre]

Maybe it should be forcing optimally, but it has been constructive but not forcing to us for so long, I am sticking with it.

 

This is one situation where I believe the vast majority of inexperienced and the minority of experienced players might be both right...one group after considerable thought, the other group after no thought.

[Cyberyeti]

We play it 100% forcing, but our simple overcalls are more up to strength than most peoples'

[Cthulhu D]

I think without discussion it is forcing just as a general meta rule and because it is a lot easier, and I play it as constructive but not forcing with spade tolerance. This comes with two big caveats: I play with very weak overcalls, and I don't play 1NT natural here which allows for a lot more auctions.

[whereagles]

Meta-rule: if RHO passes, it's forcing. If he bids, it's NF.

 

Been using it for a while and never went wrong.

[fromageGB]

Without discussion, I would assume forcing, regardless of the minimum strength of the overcall, as the weaker that may be the more you want a forcing bid when RHO passes.

[rmnka447]

As others have alluded, it is a matter of partnership agreement whether a new suit bid by advancer (i.e. overcaller's partner) is forcing or non forcing constructive.

 

Part of which method you choose is related to your overcalling style. My sense is that the more aggressively you overcall, the less important it is to force with a new suit. (Perhaps some other posters could provide more feedback on this thought.)

 

I have played both ways with a number of partners and don't see much difference in results between these two approaches.

 

What are the basic differences in methodology?

 

If you play new suits non forcing constructive, then the only way for advancer to force overcaller to bid again is with a cue bid of opener's suit (here, 1 ♦ - 1 ♠ - P - 2 ♦). Using this method to force partner is no problem for most hands. But unless you have some special agreements, it may occasionally cause some bidding problems when advancer has a strong hand with a good suit. Maybe something like ♠ xx ♥ AQx ♦ xx ♣ AKJxxx. OTOH, when advancer holds a modest hand with a good suit, say ♠ xx ♥ Axx ♦ xx ♣ KJ10xxx, advancer can offer an alternative place to play without getting the contract level too high. With a light overcall and tolerance for advancer's suit, overcaller simply passes.

 

If you play new suits forcing, then advancer can force overcaller to bid again by naming a new suit or with the cue bid. With the aforementioned strong hand, advancer simply bids 2 ♣. OTOH, holding the previous example modest hand, advancer has to Pass and hope to be able to show his suit later in the auction.

[PhilKing]

If you play new suits non forcing constructive, then the only way for advancer to force overcaller to bid again is with a cue bid of opener's suit (here, 1 ♦ - 1 ♠ - P - 2 ♦).

 

This I don't agree with. If change of suit is NF, then a jump in a new suit should be strong and game forcing rather than a fit jump.

[steve2005]

My vote would be forcing as an unpassed hand as I like a cuebid to be reserved for raises which is the other choice for an unconditional force. Usually wont have a monster either a decent suit with tolerance for ♠ or a really good suit of their own. When you do have a monster though you really need it forcing.

[aguahombre]

My vote would be forcing as an unpassed hand as I like a cuebid to be reserved for raises which is the other choice for an unconditional force. Usually wont have a monster either a decent suit with tolerance for ♠ or a really good suit of their own. When you do have a monster though you really need it forcing.

See PK's post just above yours.

[akwoo]

What are the basic differences in methodology?

 

If you play new suits non forcing constructive, then the only way for advancer to force overcaller to bid again is with a cue bid of opener's suit (here, 1 ♦ - 1 ♠ - P - 2 ♦). Using this method to force partner is no problem for most hands. But unless you have some special agreements, it may occasionally cause some bidding problems when advancer has a strong hand with a good suit. Maybe something like ♠ xx ♥ AQx ♦ xx ♣ AKJxxx. OTOH, when advancer holds a modest hand with a good suit, say ♠ xx ♥ Axx ♦ xx ♣ KJ10xxx, advancer can offer an alternative place to play without getting the contract level too high. With a light overcall and tolerance for advancer's suit, overcaller simply passes.

 

If you play new suits forcing, then advancer can force overcaller to bid again by naming a new suit or with the cue bid. With the aforementioned strong hand, advancer simply bids 2 ♣. OTOH, holding the previous example modest hand, advancer has to Pass and hope to be able to show his suit later in the auction.

 

Given the strength of my nonvulnerable 1♠ overcalls, playing new suits non forcing constructive, the first hand is towards the strong end of a non-forcing 2♣ bid and the second hand is a definite pass.

[fromageGB]

My sense is that the more aggressively you overcall, the less important it is to force with a new suit.

This is a concept I don't understand. LHO has opened. Partner has overcalled on perhaps not much. Responder has passed, so he has nothing, and you think you are not likely to want to force? Given the knowns, an opening hand opposite a pass, how the strength is shared between you and your partner makes little difference, that difference being only positional, so it is neither less important nor more important in my view.

 

Transfer replies to an overcall (Rubens) work best, because half the time you can play transfers as either weak or strong. However, in this OP scenario where my suit is lower ranking that opponent's, I do have to come down on one side or the other. Forcing for me, but no one method fits all hands.

[helene_t]

You are not very likely to have a gf opposite an overcall that could be a six count. Of course if nf means that partner will pass it with a typical 11 count then it would be convenient to have a one round force. But the nf but constructive 2c bid is imo necessary opposite a wide ranging overvall. If partner raises to 3c I want it to show something. About 9 to 11. This means that with 6~8 he.would pass, with 12-14 he would cue once and with 15 plus he would cue twice, i.e force to game.

I don't see how overcaller can show his strength accurately if he is forced to bid again with 6 but could also have 17.

[rhm]

Without prior agreement the answer is NO.

 

Whether a new suit in response to an overcall should be forcing is a very old discussion.

The majority of experts do not play it as forcing.

Lawrence has probably written the most authoritative book on overcalls, widely praised, and he suggest to play it as not forcing.

Only a minority does play it as forcing.

But to assume it to be forcing without prior agreement, as some here imply, is only arguing for trouble and poor advice.

 

Everyone appreciates that the forcing treatment makes for easier bidding when advancer has the strongest hand dealt.

 

But consider the implications

 

LHO has opened the bidding, your chances of making game goes way down, in particular if you do not fit overcallers major.

The school which plays one level overcalls in a major as requiring an opening bid is in a minority

Most play one level overcalls as wide ranging and possibly weak ("to indicate a lead").

If you do that, advancer would need a powerhouse to bid a new suit if it is forcing.

 

So the majority plays such a sequence on "frequency" grounds:

It is constructive but not forcing. Advancer denies a good fit with partner.

 

If the overcall was at two level the decision whether a new suit by advancer should be forcing is much more contentious, since overcaller's minimum is higher.

I still believe the majority of expers plays a new suit by advancer as not forcing.

 

One advantage the forcing treatment brigade tends to overlook is that you might reach game, where advancer can not force, because he is simply not strong enough, but overcaller is fitting advancer's suit and overcaller got more than his overcall did imply.

This scenario is much more common than advancer holding a powerhouse.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[mgoetze]

Nonforcing is quite popular here in Germany, too.

 

Without prior agreement the answer is NO.

 

Quod erat demonstrandum. :P

 

The default if undiscussed definitely varies regionally.

[helene_t]

Probably the default here in Yorkshire is "undiscussed". In Lancaster it was forcing for most. In France it is common to play it NF if it is a 2/1 and otherwise forcing, and I think that is the most common treatment in the Netherlands also.

 

If this particular 2♣ bid is forcing then I think it shouldn't promise much in terms of clubs. It could be a 2443 with the strength of a natural 2NT bid. 2♣ is a cheap bid so if it is forcing it can cover quite a lot. Overcaller's 2♦ rebid would, in that case, not show strength but just show "nothing to say, I wish your 2♣ bid had been nonforcing". Of course, 2♦ also covers some stronger hands.

 

What would

(1♦)-1♠-(p)-2♣

(p.)-2♦-(p)-2♥

be?

Maybe it should just be a waiting bid. We can't have a heart fit in this auction, and 2♥ is the cheapest bid. Stopping in 2♥ in a 4-3 fit would occasionally be right but even if 2♥ is natural I think most would take it as forcing.

[mycroft]

Another option, which I play in one of my very rare partnerships, is "new suits NFConst, cue=force, jump cue (if possible)=strong raise" which gives you your fit jumps back.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Transfers anyone ?

Transfer Advances by Jeff Rubens is another option.

 

For this hand:

2C = forcing 1 round

2D! = a transfer to 2H which, if simply accepted by partner, could be passed.

2H! = a transfer to 2S which is a stronger than a natural raise .

2S! = natural raise

[whereagles]

Transfers anyone ?

Transfer Advances by Jeff Rubens is another option.

 

For this hand:

2C = forcing 1 round

2D! = a transfer to 2H which, if simply accepted by partner, could be passed.

2H! = a transfer to 2S which is a stronger than a natural raise .

2S! = natural raise

 

That is probably the best method for advances. And the higher the overcall, the more efficient it is.

 

Trouble is, you need a partner to play it. (If you see what I mean...)

[fromageGB]

It's as I play too, but you do need to have an understanding or agreement of what "a natural raise" is. We define a transfer to 2♠ as being the same as an uninterrupted 1♠ 2♠ after adding on the hcp by which you have agreed an overcall could be weaker than an opening, so with two partners where an overcall may be 2 points fewer than an opening, the transfer support is 3 card 9-12, and the direct raise is 3 card weaker than that.

 

Even so, you still have the decision to make on the 2♣ bid. I see no reason why you could not have 2♣ (non-jump bids beneath the opening suit) as non-forcing, and where you are forcing have those hands jump suit, replacing the otherwise use of fit jumps in those suit(s).