Is this bid roundforcing

[Brandal]

1D-(p)-1S-(p)-2D-(p)-2H-(p)-?

 

 

The way I bid,I would now show about 9-10ish hcp

and 5S-4H.

 

Our opps in a tourney landed in 2H on 3-3 here and

they were not happy,one said roundforcing the other

said not.

 

I agreed with the one saying not,my pd agreed with the

one saying roundforcing :D

[the hog]

This serves responder right for bidding on a 3 card suit, regardless of whether it is forcing or not.

Fwiw I play this as forcing.

[Brandal]

Fwiw I play this as forcing.

It's worth the entire point to me.

 

My question might need rephrasing:

 

Would you call it system standard,or would

you most likely have to make an agreement

that it is forcing?

[flytoox]

Fwiw I play this as forcing.

It's worth the entire point to me.

 

My question might need rephrasing:

 

Would you call it system standard,or would

you most likely have to make an agreement

that it is forcing?

I think it is systematic forcing. It is very unlikely 2H is exactly better than 2D. Pd promised 6 card. To make 2H nonforcing, you have to make sure we have 8-card fit and we can only make 8 tricks. I doubt this will occur often.

[pbleighton]

In Standard American and 2/1, a new suit at the two level is always forcing.

 

I can't speak for other "standard" systems.

 

Peter

[luke warm]

wait, responder is unpassed and has bid a new suit at every opportunity? i can't think of any system (except ours heheh) where that wouldn't be forcing

[BjornH]

I do think that in an Acol-inspired bidding system, 2 H is not forcing but shows 5-4 or 5-5 and 6-10/11 points. To force you need to jump to 3 H which shows 5-5.

 

You have a problem with 5-4 and forcing to game values, but gain with 5-4/5-5 and a weak hand.

 

I think that in Norway, there were quite a few good pairs who bid this way a couple of years ago (and perhaps still do).

 

Bjørn

[Winstonm]

If there is a system where this in non-forcing, I don't even want to know, LoL.

 

winstonm

[Brandal]

If there is a system where this in non-forcing, I don't even want to know, LoL.

 

winstonm

So with 9hcp and 5-4-1-3 you pass?

 

2NT?

 

2S?

[Brandal]

wait, responder is unpassed and has bid a new suit at every opportunity? i can't think of any system (except ours heheh) where that wouldn't be forcing

Yes he was unpassed

 

Actually he held

 

Kxxxxx

KQx

AQx

x

 

Opener had

AQ

Axx

KJ10xx

xxx

 

B)

[EricK]

I think that this forcing in any modern standard system.

 

I certainly wouldn't pass as opener if a pick-up partner bid it.

 

With a 5-4-1-3 9 point hand I would simply pass as responder. Partner almost certainly has a 6 card suit so we are not yet in a hopeless contract. We might get to a hopeless contract if I try to "improve" matters.

 

Eric

[EricK]

wait, responder is unpassed and has bid a new suit at every opportunity? i can't think of any system (except ours heheh) where that wouldn't be forcing

Yes he was unpassed

 

Actually he held

 

Kxxxxx

KQx

AQx

x

 

Opener had

AQ

Axx

KJ10xx

xxx

 

B)

Once opener has rebid his diamonds (a mistake IMO as he has a balanced hand) responder can simply splinter in ♣ and they get to the easy slam.

 

Bidding a "natural" 3 card suit should be a last resort. If they were playing Bourke Relay where the responder's cheapest new suit re-bid is a non-natural GF then I could understand the 2♥ bid.

 

Eric

[Brandal]

Partner almost certainly has a 6 card suit so we are not yet in a hopeless contract.

So you would bid 1NT with 5 card diamonds.

 

If so we agree,in which case I also would pass 2D.

[Brandal]

Once opener has rebid his diamonds (a mistake IMO as he has a balanced hand) responder can simply splinter in ♣ and they get to the easy slam.

 

Bidding a "natural" 3 card suit should be a last resort. If they were playing Bourke Relay where the responder's cheapest new suit re-bid is a non-natural GF then I could understand the 2♥ bid.

 

Eric

The hands were irrelevant to my question,that's why

I didn't include them initially,obviously this pair were

not too familiar with eachother B)

 

Well the dialogue after bidding was intelligent enough....

 

Why 2H??

Why pass??

 

lol

[Brandal]

I think that this forcing in any modern standard system.

 

I certainly wouldn't pass as opener if a pick-up partner bid it.

 

With a 5-4-1-3 9 point hand I would simply pass as responder. Partner almost certainly has a 6 card suit so we are not yet in a hopeless contract. We might get to a hopeless contract if I try to "improve" matters.

 

Eric

Would it be fair to say 4th suit is gameforce,3rd suit is

roundforce?

 

Or is that wrong,based on what you guys say?

[EricK]

I think that this forcing in any modern standard system.

 

I certainly wouldn't pass as opener if a pick-up partner bid it.

 

With a 5-4-1-3 9 point hand I would simply pass as responder. Partner almost certainly has a 6 card suit so we are not yet in a hopeless contract. We might get to a hopeless contract if I try to "improve" matters.

 

Eric

Would it be fair to say 4th suit is gameforce,3rd suit is

roundforce?

 

Or is that wrong,based on what you guys say?

I think that playing 3rd suit as RF is fairly standard, but I don't think there is a standard answer to the question of how far fourth suit is forcing. Some play it as GF others as simply RF.

 

My personal feeling is that a compromise is best:- if opener bids above 2 of his first suit then we are GF. This means that opener doesn't have to jump to 3NT to show slight extras in a sequence like 1♥ 1♠ 2♣ 2♦.

 

Eric

[Walddk]

F1, 10+ hcp. Easy to remember: New suit by unpassed hand is always forcing.

 

Roland

[pclayton]

Actually, in 2/1, a lot of players play it as non-forcing!

 

Its one of those home-made auctions so that the 4-4 fit isn't lost. But this is only by agreement. To force, a sort of 3♣ as NMF is in use.

 

Those of us that play Reverse Flannery do not have to make up such agreements.

[Rebound]

New suit by unpassed hand is always forcing.

 

Roland

I consider this to be so fundamental to standard bidding that I'm surprised it even came up for discussion.

 

But then, I once had a pickup partner pass after this uncontested auction: 1♥-2♥-2♠ so go figure. I know it's not the same thing, but it shows no matter how many millions of people there are who would consider this a forcing bid, you can always find one exception lol.

[beatrix45]

B)

 

Styles have evolved over the past three or four decades. Many, many moons ago the rule was that a new suit by responder was always forcing. Then somewhere in the 1970's it became the fashion to play that a new suit by responder was non-forcing IF opener had made a limit rebid (e.g. 1NT or a rebid of the suit she opened).

 

Confusion and ferment ensued until someone came up with 'fourth suit forcing' over the 1NT rebid, which is essentially an artificial relay bid asking opener to clarify her hand. This works pretty well, and I urge you to adopt it.

[Brandal]

New suit by unpassed hand is always forcing.

 

Roland

I consider this to be so fundamental to standard bidding that I'm surprised it even came up for discussion.

 

But then, I once had a pickup partner pass after this uncontested auction: 1♥-2♥-2♠ so go figure. I know it's not the same thing, but it shows no matter how many millions of people there are who would consider this a forcing bid, you can always find one exception lol.

I'm not surprised by anything anymore,

since I've been visiting myhands traveller

from tournaments I've played in.......

 

On almost every board played by say 40 tables,

there are at least 20 different contracts,usually

stretching from about 1000 to -1000 or so.

 

B)

[the hog]

Despite what some posters have said Brandal, the sequence:

1D 1S 2D 2H is NOT forcing in traditional Acol. To be honest however, I do not know of many people who still play this as nf. (I do know of some). It does seem like trying to stop on the head of a pin. Most Acol players today would play this as forcing, certainly most tournament players would do so.

[HeartA]

Would it be fair to say 4th suit is gameforce,3rd suit is

roundforce?

 

Or is that wrong,based on what you guys say?

yep.

[Fluffy]

Around here most people play 1♣-1♠-2♣-2♥ non forcing, and 2♦ as anything. But besides that new suits (unless 1NT rebid) are forcing.

[helene_t]

2♥ here should just be a relay. You can play negative relays here if you want, so that a raise to 3♦ would be forcing.

 

And opener shouldn't rebid his 5-card diamonds. If this hand is not within the 1NT-interval, he should rebid 1NT, otherwise open 1NT.

 

If you don't play relays, it makes some sense to play this as non-forcing in Acol since opener is slightly more likely to rebid 5-cards than in strong-NT systems. But in any natural strong-NT system, 2♥ should be forcing. I think the confusion in Scandinavia and Netherlands is related to the fact that some 40 years ago we took over the English Acol system, changed from weak NT to strong NT, and forgot to change the rest of the system accordingly.

 

When teaching Dutch Acol to beginners, teachers contradict each other about this issue. I've even seen in the Dutch BF magazine "Bridge" the advise to beginners that responder's second bid should be defined differently at IMPs and at matchpoints. Incredible.