Liversidge Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 We play Acol. I opened. The bidding went 1♣-1♠-2♣-2♥-?I had 12 HCP and ♠xx ♥AKJx , ♦xx ♣Axxxx. Partner had 11 HCP, 6 good spades and four hearts. I passed, which I know was a bad mistake. My muddled thinking was that his bid showed 10-11 points max. With more he would have made a different bid to show his strength. Having thought about it I suspect his bid was unlimited - he might have had 16-17 points and still not have had a way of showing his strength. I have been taught that an unlimited bid is forcing. My question is this: In general, is partner's rebid forcing? And what point range can it show? (Klinger says a rebid by responder in a new suit after opener makes a simple rebid of his suit is forcing. Brunner says it is not. Both give examples very similar to ours to support their positions.) No need to comment on my pass. I am feeling bad enough about it as it is! :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 In passing, this problem is why a lot of people play 2♦ as artificial and forcing here, if you do, 2♥ can be NF, but otherwise it's forcing, unless you're playing VERY old school where 3♥ is nat forcing rather than the splinter that most use now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 Most people at my club play that the 2♣ rebid is very often a 5-card suit and doesn't even suggest a particularly good 5-card suit. It is what they would rebid with any 0445, 0134 or 2245 shape without 4-card support. If that is your style then I think it is better to play 2♥ as nonforcing, even if you don't have an artificial 2♦ bid available. Responder can jump to 3♥ if he really wants to force. But as usual, it is more important to have a firm agreement with partner than to play optimal methods. If undiscussed I would assume forcing because:- that is what everyone (except Brunner, apparently) has been recommending for the last few decades- in general, passing a forcing bid is more risky than bidding on after a NF bid. Both in terms of results and in terms of erosion of partnership trust. Better would be to avoid rebidding 2♣ with a mediocre 5-card suit. If that is your agreement then responder can safely pass with any weak hand and hence 2♥ becomes a 1-round force. BTW, you should probably open that hand 1NT, somewhat depending on vulnerability. That would have saved you from bidding those **** clubs twice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 Undiscussed, I think most players would consider it forcing. I would treat it as forcing unless I had a definite agreement otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 The traditional meaning in Acol is non-forcing but the modern approach is more commonly forcing. If you are so worried about the weak 5♠4♥ hand, it is better to bring in a Reverse Flannery response than to mess up the constructive auctions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tramticket Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 As Zel says, this was traditionally non-forcing in Acol, but the modern approach is to treat the bid as forcing. Frances Hinden wrote a great article in English Bridge August 2015 edition (http://www.ebu.co.uk/englishbridge). You already know that you are worth a raise - even if partner's bid is non-forcing. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liversidge Posted January 13, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2017 Frances Hinden wrote a great article in English Bridge August 2015 edition (http://www.ebu.co.uk/englishbridge). Excellent. Answers all my questions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Tu Posted January 13, 2017 Report Share Posted January 13, 2017 In passing, this problem is why a lot of people play 2♦ as artificial and forcing here, if you do, 2♥ can be NF, but otherwise it's forcing, unless you're playing VERY old school where 3♥ is nat forcing rather than the splinter that most use now. Is splinter really the most common usage of 3H? Perhaps it is in Britain, I wouldn't know. My thought is if you are not using 3H to handle 5-5 GF hands you get into ambiguous situations. 1c-1s-2c-2d!-3c-3h?? Is this 5-5 GF or worried about diamonds? 1c-1s-2c-2d!-3d-3h what is this? Personally I'd rather have a way much to unambiguously show a 5-5 majors hand and have opener be able to confidently decide between 4h/3nt/4s than be able to splinter in hearts with club support given silent opponents. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted January 14, 2017 Report Share Posted January 14, 2017 Is splinter really the most common usage of 3H? Perhaps it is in Britain, I wouldn't know. My thought is if you are not using 3H to handle 5-5 GF hands you get into ambiguous situations. 1c-1s-2c-2d!-3c-3h?? Is this 5-5 GF or worried about diamonds? 1c-1s-2c-2d!-3d-3h what is this? Personally I'd rather have a way much to unambiguously show a 5-5 majors hand and have opener be able to confidently decide between 4h/3nt/4s than be able to splinter in hearts with club support given silent opponents. 1c-1s-2c-2d!-3c-3h?? Is this 5-5 GF or worried about diamonds? 5-5 GF1c-1s-2c-2d!-3d-3h what is this? 3♦ shows extras for us, 2N would be bad with diamonds, I suspect 3♥ is ambiguous but we will be able to play 4N and have the values for it if need be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts