Is this forcing? If so what bids?

[SimonFa]

Vul v Non, Teams, 2/1, partner deals.

 

♥JT9532 ♠KT6 ♦763 ♣6

 

1NT P 2D 3C

P P ?

 

1NT = 15-17 may contain a singleton (A or K) or 6 card minor

2D = transfer

 

Is south forced to bid in this situation? Obviously with 6 cards it's tempting, but what if its only 5?

 

If you do bid is system generally on and therefore 3D is still a transfer or does South have to bid direct?

[Cyberyeti]

We would play the NTers pass NF and 3♦ as a natural suit, but others may choose to differ (I habitually play a weak NT where wrongsiding is not as bad).

[helene_t]

I suppose you could play that 3♦ is an invitational (or stronger) hand with long hearts and that 3♥ is just to play. Without any special agreements I would assume that 3♦ is natural and nonforcing and that 3♥ is to play. So there's no way to invite.

 

Responder is of course not forced to bid. I would bid 3♥ with this hand unless partner is likely to take it as invitational.

 

You should not play transfers in situations like this. It is an advantage to put overcaller on lead. Many players think that it is important that the strong hand declares and that this is the reason for playing transfers. This is at best a half-truth. Probably a myth created by lazy bridge teachers who couldn't think of a better way of justifying transfers.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

#1 2D may have been intendended as a weak sign off, why should a player

who wanted to play t the 2 level be forced to bid again

#2 If you have a 55 hand, that planned to show both suit starting with a

transfer, why should you now be unable to see it through?

3D is natural, showing values, ... due to lack of space it should be gf,

 

#3 3H could be either to play or inv., I guess to play, is more valuable, but

the NT opener usually wont have a 3 card fit, with suitable values

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[pescetom]

#3 3H could be either to play or inv., I guess to play, is more valuable, but

the NT opener usually wont have a 3 card fit, with suitable values

We play that if the opps interfere low over a Jacoby transfer and the NT opener has super-accept values then he will make the usual 3 level completion with 4-card fit or double with 3-card fit and maximum strength. If he passes instead then responder can always bid a suit naturally at 3-level or Texas transfer his major at 4-level.

[ggwhiz]

Not forcing and I would pass at this vul.

 

It's not hard to imagine lho having short hearts and partner has denied a hand that will play well in them.

[Winstonm]

Not forcing and I would pass at this vul.

 

It's not hard to imagine lho having short hearts and partner has denied a hand that will play well in them.

 

Ditto

[steve2005]

We would play the NTers pass NF and 3♦ as a natural suit, but others may choose to differ (I habitually play a weak NT where wrongsiding is not as bad).

siding hand is overrated as an advantage for transfers. The real advantage is you can show more hands.

If 3D is a real transfer you have no way to show HD 2-suiter

 

 

[tritonium]

Play Lebensohl and make it easy on yourself.

[PhilG007]

Vul v Non, Teams, 2/1, partner deals.

 

♥JT9532 ♠KT6 ♦763 ♣6

 

1NT P 2D 3C

P P ?

 

1NT = 15-17 may contain a singleton (A or K) or 6 card minor

2D = transfer

 

Is south forced to bid in this situation? Obviously with 6 cards it's tempting, but what if its only 5?

 

If you do bid is system generally on and therefore 3D is still a transfer or does South have to bid direct?

I wouldn't be remotely tempted to venture to the 3 level with only 4 pts and a stringy heart suit Definite pass.

[MrAce]

Play Lebensohl and make it easy on yourself.

 

LOL

[gszes]

IMHO (at these colors) playing 3h as "weak" makes close to zero sense. Fighting over a part score with a weak hand is looking for a disaster (when we could settle for the opps making a club partial) and where does one draw the line on "weak"? I think 3h should be considered invitational and this hand qualifies due to 2 factors. 1. The 6 card length offers a reasonable degree of safety. 2. Even though it is only worth around 6.5 the opening 1n bidder's hand has improved significantly being :behind: the club bidder and where the vast majority of the defensive assets are most likely located. Opener's hand range and card types still mater quite a bit so an invite is proper as opener may very well be stuck for a bid over 3c because they do not want to compete opposite a broke 2d bidder.

 

I would go with the following scheme

x = GF No club stop (may have other assets if 3n OR a penalty pass does not look appealing)

3d = natural and invitational (with GF just x)

3h = invitational

3s = patterning out with a hand that intended to bid 2s over 2h. For me that means at least 55 majors and invitational.

3n = club stop (little to no slam interest)

4c = splinter and 6+ hearts

4d = splinter and 6+ hearts

4h = A hand with short clubs that was going to just simply raise 2h to 3h after the transfer but has improved due to the club bidding by the opps.

[SimonFa]

Thanks for the replies, very helpful.

 

Going back to my first question can this be a forcing situation as partner has limited her hand? I seem to remember reading on here some time ago that a limited hand can't create a forcing situation. (Justin Lall springs to mind, but apologies if it wasn't him)

[helene_t]

Going back to my first question can this be a forcing situation as partner has limited her hand? I seem to remember reading on here some time ago that a limited hand can't create a forcing situation.

Here, opener is limited to 17 points and responder can have zero. So opener can't create a force - responder, if he has 0, will always be able to make the decision that we need to defend undoubled and opener should not prevent him from making this decision.

 

Compare to

pass-1♣

1♠-2♦

3♣*-?

*=Ingberman applies so this is positive, say 8-11 points.

Here, responder is limited by not having opened, but since opener has shown 16+, responder can still have enough to force (even to force to game).

 

Of course it can also be that the limited hand creates a force because it knows that we belong in some other partscore. A transfer by a passed hand is forcing even if you play weak NT.

[RD350LC]

Not forcing and I would pass at this vul.

 

It's not hard to imagine lho having short hearts and partner has denied a hand that will play well in them.

I would pass as well. We might have an 8 card fit, but if partner can open 1 NT with a high singleton, we could be on a 7 card fit-and no reason to bid. Especially red vs white.

[xbabarx]

LOL

Lol

[gszes]

Thanks for the replies, very helpful.

 

Going back to my first question can this be a forcing situation as partner has limited her hand? I seem to remember reading on here some time ago that a limited hand can't create a forcing situation. (Justin Lall springs to mind, but apologies if it wasn't him)

 

you open the bidding 1n (15-17) with Axx Kx AQxxx Axx (no opp biding) p bids 2d and you dutifully accept the transfer to 2h and next partner surprises you with 3d (gf natural). Your 17 count and 5332 hand have suddenly become so good that stopping short of 6d seems ridiculous and even 7d is on the radar. The point being is that under these conditions if might be quite acceptable for the LIMITED opener to bid 4n (unless the partnership has some special agreements as to how to handle these situations).

If responder shows 1 key card 6d is enough if they show 2 keys we should make one more grand slam try and if responder can show some life bidding 7d should be no worse than a 33 heart split and probably much better if not ice cold. This is admittedly a somewhat extreme example but even limited hands can reevaluate significantly as the bidding proceeds. Another might be AQJ AQJ JTxx xxx You open 1n 15-17 (again no opp bidding) partner bids 2d and you dutifully accept the transfer to 2h and p now bids 2s (playing this as at least 55 majors and invitational - not all will agree). You look at your 15 count and boring balanced distribution and bid 4s (this is an attempt to rightside the contract in case responder has some Kx that needs protection from the opening lead since we have nothing that needs such protection. It may not always make but the odds are pretty darn huge we have at least 9 if not 10 major suit tricks. You have to REEVALUATE constantly even if you have what appears to be a boring balanced hand. LISTEN to the bidding and decide if your hand has gotten better or worse or stayed the same:))))))

[hamish32]

IMHO (at these colors) playing 3h as "weak" makes close to zero sense. Fighting over a part score with a weak hand is looking for a disaster (when we could settle for the opps making a club partial) and where does one draw the line on "weak"? I think 3h should be considered invitational and this hand qualifies due to 2 factors. 1. The 6 card length offers a reasonable degree of safety. 2. Even though it is only worth around 6.5 the opening 1n bidder's hand has improved significantly being :behind: the club bidder and where the vast majority of the defensive assets are most likely located. Opener's hand range and card types still mater quite a bit so an invite is proper as opener may very well be stuck for a bid over 3c because they do not want to compete opposite a broke 2d bidder.

 

I would go with the following scheme

x = GF No club stop (may have other assets if 3n OR a penalty pass does not look appealing)

3d = natural and invitational (with GF just x)

3h = invitational

3s = patterning out with a hand that intended to bid 2s over 2h. For me that means at least 55 majors and invitational.

3n = club stop (little to no slam interest)

4c = splinter and 6+ hearts

4d = splinter and 6+ hearts

4h = A hand with short clubs that was going to just simply raise 2h to 3h after the transfer but has improved due to the club bidding by the opps.

 

X as GF so that you can make a range of weak and invitational bids is not great. Expert standard treats X as takeout - at the 3 level it has to show a hand that can tolerate a penalty pass or the bid of a 4 card !S suit at the 3 level.

[hamish32]

One thing you do not mention are your agreements over 3C. What would the 1NT hand need to act over 3C?

 

It makes some sense to play 3H as a 4 card raise / 3D as a maximal super accept / and X being a control heavy max with 3 card support with a small doubleton in C. This helps responder decide what to do as with those agreements with the hand you have or even one a little stronger pass is clear. It seems your partner may have a very good hand for H but still passes 3C leaving you feeling that you should bid with your limited values incase you find partner with something.

 

Additionally did you have a way to raise to 4H on the previous round? we like South-African Texas where 4C shows a transfer to 4H and 4D a transfer to 4S - we use these with weak hands where we want opener to play the hand. your hand is not quite good enough in those methods for a 4C bid in response to 1NT.

 

--------------

regarding normal methods after 3C on your auction a new suit is forcing / X is takeout / and 3H is an invite with 6 (since with GF and 6 you already bid 4C and with a GF with 5 you can X). You need a better hand to invite if partner would have shown support as described above - this hand is a clear pass.

[FelicityR]

Is south forced to bid in this situation?

 

The simple answer is No. In my view the 2♦ transfer was all the hand was worth. Guessing at the three level vulnerable is not an option.

[steve2005]

Is south forced to bid in this situation? Obviously with 6 cards it's tempting, but what if its only 5?

Another important question is what does North need to act and what do X, 3♦ and 3♥ mean.

What North needs to act may affect what South needs. But South definitely can pass.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=skt6hjt9532d763c6&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1n(15-17)p2d(TFR)3cpp?]133|200|

IMO.

1. You are free to pass LHO's 3♣ overall and you probably should.

2. 3♦ would be NAT not a TFR. You lack the bidding space for the luxury of transfers.

3. Double of 3♣ would be T/O.[/hv]