Semi-forcing NT vs Forcing NT

[P_Marlowe]

Abstain.!There should have been a third option namely Nonforcing..We play nonforcing.

But if you play 2/1 as game force then obviously you have to play 1NT responce forcing.

semiforcing, you have to have a bid for the 10-12 semi bal. hand, one suit. inv. hand can go

via jump shift (giving up other usages for 3m), but the 10-12 semi. bal. hands (54??) in the minors

have to have a bid.

[P_Marlowe]

Bidding structure is always about trade-offs. When you pick semi-forcing NT you give up on certain sequences you could use if the bid were forcing; when you play forcing, you give up the ability to play 1N and thereby describing a minimum balanced hand should the auction proceed.

 

I think it has more to do with the type of scoring you typically play. In matchpoints, all hands are equally important so I would play non-forcing in matchpoints; game and slam accuracy is paramount to imps, so I would play forcing in imp play.

at least some of the neg. arguments, mainly not being able to play 1NT, loose weight in an MP

context, but going down in 3M, when 1NT is making is also nice at IMPs.

[nullve]

Semi-Forcing is the term commonly employed for a non forcing NT response, both are the same - meaning opener is not forced to response on min balanced hands.

The SF 1N response typically includes a 3c limit raise and Opener is expected to bid again except with awkward shapes like 5M(332) and 4522/45(31) and no extras.

 

If 'NF 1N' is the 1M-1N structure most Norwegians use when they say they play 2/1, then the 1N response doesn't include a 3c limit raise, so Opener has less incentive to bid again with mildly unbalanced shape like 5M4m22/5M4m(31) and no extras.

[Winstonm]

at least some of the neg. arguments, mainly not being able to play 1NT, loose weight in an MP

context, but going down in 3M, when 1NT is making is also nice at IMPs.

 

True, but think about all the associated bids that can have meanings narrowed when you get to bid 1NT then 4M with a game-forcing strength hand that has no interest in slam whatsoever.

[kernow]

semi forcing if i have opened weak and am playing MP or IMPs

i just like the flexibility

as i play 2/1 a 1NT reply is limited to 12 HCP

[helene_t]

I would like to vote forcing after 1♠ but semiforcing after 1♥. This a partially due to the Flannery issue but more because after 1♠-1NT we could still have a hearts fit.

[blackshoe]

With some partners, I play that responder's 1NT is NF, balanced, about 6 to 10 points. With others I play 1NT is F, may be unbalanced, and shows about 6 to 12 points. With still others, I play that 1NT is NF, may be unbalanced, about 6 to 12 points. In the middle case, ACBL wants me (or partner, whoever opened) to announce "forcing". In the last case, ACBL wants a "semi-forcing" announcement. Which is best? Well, in a 2/1 GF context, I prefer forcing, but I may be coming around to semi-forcing. I got hung up at first on "what do you do with a balanced three card limit raise?" but I'm not sure that's all that big a problem. A crappy balanced opening opposite that raise may not do well. That's what I'm hoping, anyway. B-)

[iandayre]

If you play semi-forcing 1NT response, you should pass holding a balanced hand that would pass a delayed 3-card limit raise. If you would accept, you bid your lower-ranking 3 card minor (or 2 card minor if 4522). All hands with 6 in the major or a second 4 card or longer suit bid accordingly. I played forcing for a number of years, switched to semi-forcing some time ago, with generally good results.

[steve2005]

My NF 1N response includes a garbage 3c raise, so I risk playing 1N instead of 2M on a combined 14-18 count. Is that so bad?

yes bad 1N likely down Only advantage is defense hard especially as you have a fit they don't know about.

so weak might make if ruffs in weak hand. Plus opps mat have a suit with tricks that you can stop in trump but notrump.

[hamish32]

Playing a weak NT with Game Forcing 2/1 responses it makes perfect sense to play a forcing 1NT since you always want to pull 1NT since you always have a second suit or more power.

 

Playing weak NT with non GF 2/1 responses - non forcing NT response makes sense.

 

Playing Strong NT with Game Forcing 2/1 semi-forcing NT makes sense since with a weak NT 5332 hand and some sub-optimal openings you are better on average to be allowed to pass 1NT even though it might have a bad 12 count.

 

Some people prefer a forcing NT when play playing GF 2/1 and strong NT - I expect they may be the people that prefer sound openings so they have less disadvantage in having to find a bid over the 1NT response and gain an additional advantage in being able to include more hands in their 1NT response since partner will always respond. Some of these folk even include some specific quite strong hands in the 1NT bid since its 100% forcing.

 

EDIT: I think standard methods include 10-12 bal no fit and 10-11 with 3 card support as well as 5-9 no fit. Some people (Burgan players and some others) also include a 6 card lower suit with 10-11 points these intermediate raises are played by many as jumps and those that choose this method seem very positive about it.

[fromageGB]

semi forcing if i have opened weak and am playing MP or IMPs

i just like the flexibility

as i play 2/1 a 1NT reply is limited to 12 HCP

So with 13 hcp you bid a 2/1 in a 4 card suit? Playing FNT, you have the advantage that it is always 5.

[miamijd]

As Mike777 noted, there isn't a lot of difference, and most people play the same whether they call it forcing or semi-forcing.

 

I play "forcing," but opener is allowed to pass with a pile of junk. For example, let's say I open 1S with:

 

JTxxx QJx Axx KJ

 

I think most of you would do the same, though some might pass. Partner responds 1NT. What do I have to lose by passing? Well, I suppose partner could have 12 balanced and we make 3NT, but with a decent 12, I force game (yeah, I get to some 23 point games, but as Meckwell have proven over the years, some of em make, too). And partner could have the 3-card limit raise, but in that case, 1NT is apt to be a much better spot that 3S.

 

What do I gain? Well, if I respond 2D, what's partner's most likely bid? 2S - by a mile. Wouldn't you rather plan 1NT?

 

So yeah, about twice a month, I'll end up passing the forcing NT. Big deal. Or rather, what's the big deal?

 

Best,

Mike

[nullve]

As Mike777 noted, there isn't a lot of difference, and most people play the same whether they call it forcing or semi-forcing.

Maybe true if all of Opener's rebids are natural, but I doubt you can get a decent version of e.g. Gazzilli or transfer rebids if Opener has to find a rebid on every hand with 12-14, 5M(332).

[mike777]

So you actually play a forcing NT, but also use it as a psyche control? I don't think we allow that here.

 

excellent question...you should prealert if you open lite....at least that is how I was taught Of course you also put this on your cc

 

but yes you only pass semi forcing nt when you have a minimum.... a dead minimum we are not talking about psyches...here but standard openings just lite......say a junky 11 but not totally junky 11 which you can not open, and yes this is rare..so you wish to call it 90-95 or97 forcing nt I can live with that

 

I note this style forcing many many hand types through 1nt...you must live with that

[mike777]

Maybe true if all of Opener's rebids are natural, but I doubt you can get a decent version of e.g. Gazzilli or transfer rebids if Opener has to find a rebid on every hand with 12-14, 5M(332).

 

 

yep the dreaded 2c rebid....rare thank goodness.

 

 

1s=1nt=2c also starts BART which can help after that startbut your point stands

 

 

as for gazzilli or transfer rebids if you open a lite style....I don't know....I leave others to comment.

 

I expect if you open very sound, ty al roth, this becomes less of a problem as one passes many of the problem hands in first and second seat

[rhm]

If you open lite I would strongly recommend you play semiforcing nt...You are more likely to want to pass 1nt to show your junky bal or semi bal hand.

Keep in mind you will still rebid with 2 decent suits or more than a dead minimum. In any event you will be surprised how seldom passing 1nt comes up in practice. Please keep in mind playing this style you are pushing many hand types through 1nt.

 

OTOH if you open pretty sound you will never want to pass so forcing 1nt makes more sense.

I do not see your point.

Whether you open light or sound has an impact on the minimum requirements partner needs for a 2/1 response.

Either way opener can have a minimum for opening, whatever that is according to your agreements and style.

And if opener has a balanced minimum opening in your style you will want to pass 1NT. Such hands are frequent.

 

My feeling is that 1NT forcing is in theory unsound.

If responder has not enough to go to the two level you want to be able to stop as early as possible if the requirements for game are not present.

Of course playing a bid forcing increases the number of possible sequences. But this is true for any forcing bid.

But forcing bids also forces opener to find a new bid when he has none. Accordingly a rebid of 2♣ or 2♦ are much more likely to be 3 card suits than when the bid is made over a 1NT response which could have been passed.

 

The concept that a limit raise shows 4 trumps is a consequence of playing 1NT forcing.

I see little benefit of doing so.

Bid 1NT with a balanced limit raise with 3 trumps.

If opener passes 1NT, he should be (semi)balanced and you are most likely in a good contract.

In fact opener can use as a criteria, whether he would have rejected a balanced three card limit raise. If yes and if he is (semi)balanced he should pass 1NT.

Just agree to limit raise directly if you have an unbalanced invitation with 3 card support.

Of course there must be some compensating high card values values for an unbalanced 3 card limit raise compared to an unbalanced 4 card limit raise.

 

I never had problems with this.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[mike777]

It is fine if you want to call it semiforcing nt or nonforcing nt but we rarely pass....it comes out the same. the most important point would be you rarely pass....the issue is not does opener have a minimum hand....the issue is does opener have a dead minimum hand there is a huge difference in standards of measurement....this is where the confusion in the discussion arises.

 

Also pls keep in mind we are talking about hands where the opp are silent....you have a dead minimum hand...pard responds 1nt and the opp are silent.