Is this sequence forcing or not...?

[Dinarius]

Playing 5 card majors, as dealer you open.

 

The bidding goes:

 

1H : 2D

3D : 3H

 

Is 3H forcing?

 

Secondly, for the record, my hand was:

 

K

87432

KQJ

K843

 

Rightly or wrongly, I chose to open 1H and then had to find a rebid. With a wretched 7 loser hand, I figured a simple Diamond raise was best. What would others have done?

 

D.

 

Ps. Please comment on the forcing/non-forcing question in isolation from the actual deal. It could obviously occur with a multitude of hands.

[Hanoi5]

I'd say forcing.

[helene_t]

Yes, forcing. The reason is that:

- if your 3♦ bid shows extra values, you are already in a game force

- if 2♦ is not a gf and 3♦ does not show extras, partner would have passed 3♦ with a minimum so when he bids on, he is forcing to game.

 

In most natural 5cM systems, your 3♦ shows extra values so you would need to rebid 2♥, but that is a matter of agreement.

[aguahombre]

Yes, forcing. The reason is that:

- if your 3♦ bid shows extra values, you are already in a game force

- if 2♦ is not a gf and 3♦ does not show extras, partner would have passed 3♦ with a minimum so when he bids on, he is forcing to game.

 

In most natural 5cM systems, your 3♦ shows extra values so you would need to rebid 2♥, but that is a matter of agreement.

Helene is undoubtedly correct about the standard understandings when playing a natural 5cM (and not 2/1 g.f.) system. But, OMG, what a wonderful parlay of bad ideas. Responder doesn't promise a rebid when he bids 2D; Opener can't raise with KQJ, can't rebid 2NT which also shows extras, and must rebid a non-forcing 2H on 8xxxx.

[P_Marlowe]

Even if you had to go via a 2/1 response to show a 3 card limit raise for openers major

(something like this is / was part of the French standard system / FD+), after discovering

the double fit, responders hand did not get any weaker, contrary responders hand improved,

hence 3M in this seq. is forcing.

 

In the context of fast arrival, which would apply, 3M showes even SI.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[mike777]

forcing..

 

 

one solution is to pass, not open your hand.

[helene_t]

Helene is undoubtedly correct about the standard understandings when playing a natural 5cM (and not 2/1 g.f.) system. But, OMG, what a wonderful parlay of bad ideas. Responder doesn't promise a rebid when he bids 2D; Opener can't raise with KQJ, can't rebid 2NT which also shows extras, and must rebid a non-forcing 2H on 8xxxx.

2h is forcing.

[Dinarius]

Should have said no 2/1 - just as natural as possible.

 

Yes, pass (instead of opening) was a consideration.

 

I'm guessing from the replies then that, partner's 3H is never simply a final admission of 3 card support with 10/11 points/8 loser holding, which of course opener would pass?

 

Thanks for the replies.

 

D.

[gordontd]

Should have said no 2/1 - just as natural as possible.

 

Yes, pass (instead of opening) was a consideration.

 

I'm guessing from the replies then that, partner's 3H is never simply a final admission of 3 card support with 10/11 points/8 loser holding, which of course opener would pass?

 

Thanks for the replies.

 

D.

I think there are some Acol players who would play it that way, since it's only when partner raises that responder knows opener's first suit to be 5+ cards long.

[helene_t]

Well you never know how partner Iintended it . People who have a background in English acol or some other system in which 3H could arguably be non forcing might think it works the same way think it works the same way in a 5cM system.

[P_Marlowe]

Should have said no 2/1 - just as natural as possible.

 

Yes, pass (instead of opening) was a consideration.

 

I'm guessing from the replies then that, partner's 3H is never simply a final admission of 3 card support with 10/11 points/8 loser holding, which of course opener would pass?

 

Thanks for the replies.

 

D.

See my response. I never liked the French approach, never really understood it.

The presence of the double fit will in general improve the inv. hand.

There may be hands, where it is right to stop, but those hands, that did not

get improved by the double fit are rare, even rarer is that you will face an

opener were you exactly make 3.

As they say: stopping on a dime is not worth it.

 

Bridge is a bidders game, even hopeless game can be made.

And responder has always the option to downgrade a hand to a single raise 6-10.

[helene_t]

With an invitational hand with 3card support just bid an immediate 3h if your system doesn't have a better way of dealing with it. But Uwe's approach is fine also. However it does mean that opener cannot rebid 2nt with a minimum since responder would have to bid 3H then with an invitational hand with 3card support. That would be forcing and may take you too high.

[gnasher]

With an invitational hand with 3card support just bid an immediate 3h if your system doesn't have a better way of dealing with it. But Uwe's approach is fine also. However it does mean that opener cannot rebid 2nt with a minimum since responder would have to bid 3H then with an invitational hand with 3card support. That would be forcing and may take you too high.

In standard French, which is what Uwe was talking about, I think 1♥-2♦;2NT shows a strong notrump, so rebidding it with a minimum wasn't an option anyway.

[fromageGB]

There's much to be said for 2/1GF. However, I like Helene's comment that responder with a minimum could pass 3♦, a fit, so if he bids again it must be 100% forcing.

 

What would I have done with the opening hand playing non-2/1-GF? As you did. Anticipating a spade response I am happy to rebid 1NT, bid ♣ over NT/♣, or ♦ over ♦. I don't think 3♦ is forcing.

[PhilKing]

I'm guessing from the replies then that, partner's 3H is never simply a final admission of 3 card support with 10/11 points/8 loser holding, which of course opener would pass?

D.

 

The simple reason is that if partner has about 11 points and 3 hearts he should just raise 1♥ to 3♥ (which barring a specific agreement is just invitational), in the first place.

[Vampyr]

2h is forcing.

 

In the auction 1♥-2♦-2♥? Really?

[helene_t]

Well the OP system was just described as "five card majors" so anything is possible. In Vienna it is nf. But I am not aware of any reasonably modern 5cM system in which 2H is nf.

[mike777]

yes in most 5 card systems 2d or a 2over 1 promises a rebid. Perhaps not in 4 card system or acol.

 

Of course as Helene points out you can play whatever you want.

 

 

again in the OP there is such a rebid problem perhaps pass is best to start out unless you play some light opening system.

[Vampyr]

Well the OP system was just described as "five card majors" so anything is possible. In Vienna it is nf. But I am not aware of any reasonably modern 5cM system in which 2H is nf.

 

It is in Acol with 5-card majors, which is very popular in my part of the country. Not that I am assuming that OP plays that, but I am not assuming anything.

[helene_t]

Yes ok. But that's because the system is not designed as a 5-card major system but is a 4-card major system that has had a minor tweek.

 

1♥-2♦

3♦-3♥

may not be forcing in all versions of Acol. But in Acol with 5-card majors, shouldn't it be? Responder could have bid an immediate 3♥ with an invitational hand and even if he wouldn't necesarily do that, the double fit should be enough to make it worth a game force.

[Zelandakh]

Well the OP system was just described as "five card majors" so anything is possible. In Vienna it is nf. But I am not aware of any reasonably modern 5cM system in which 2H is nf.

It is in Acol with 5-card majors

:lol: :blink: :lol:

 

Playing a standard 5 card major system I would pass the OP hand. I am all for light openings in general but this hand is frankly just garbage and worth nowhere near the face value of 12hcp. Having opened it, the only reasonable rebid is 2♥, planning to bid 3♦ on the next round if that is still possible. That said, the OP is from Ireland so some Acol-based system is not impossible and we should probably find out a little more before belabouring this point.

 

In any case, many Acol books have suggested playing this sequence as forcing and I would never pass it playing with a pick up partner even in the Acol rooms. Passing it playing SA(YC) would be foolhardy.

 

It would also not surprise me to find that the issue that (presumably) came up on this hand relates back as much to Responder as to Opener. Again, we need to wait to find out what actually happened before passing comment on that.

[ahydra]

It's quite common in 5cM, non-2/1 systems to go via 2x if you have a 3-card limit raise (with a direct raise guaranteeing 4), isn't it? So unless you decide to automatically upgrade to a GF based on the double fit, 1H-2D; 3D-3H could just be responder showing a 3-card limit raise, and hence NF.

 

There's also the question of form of scoring. At teams, barring any of the above "it's just a limit raise" considerations 3H should be forcing as responder could have passed 3D. But at pairs responder might think 3H and 3D both make 9 tricks (or even ten in 3D) and wants to play in the major for extra points.

 

As for 1H-2D; 2H - we play this as NF (only a change of suit forces a rebid from partner). This allows us to not get into a no-play 2NT when opener has an 11-count with a good 6cM and responder a semi-balanced 10. Indeed I find this works quite well as playing a 2NT rebid by responder as 10-12 (as in traditional Acol) can often lead to a right headache for opener.

 

Given that 2H on 8xxxx is the only rebid available after 1H-2D, I too would be tempted to pass the OP hand.

 

ahydra