Is 4C forcing?

[barmar]

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1d1h2c2h4cp]133|100[/hv]

I was south and I thought 4♣ was invitational, my partner intended it as forcing; I passed with an 11 count including ♥Jxx. We missed a game that most pairs bid, and slam is cold barring extreme distribution.

 

My thinking was that 3♣ would be merely competing, showing a normal opening with a club fit. 4♣ is stronger than that, but not forcing. If he wants to force to game he can cue bid 3♥ or just bid game. I had nothing more than my original 2♣ bid showed, so I thought I'd shown my hand.

 

We don't play Minorwood, so 4♣ was natural.

[FelicityR]

I would play it as forcing as partner's jumped, but there again I am no expert with specified bids at this level. Yes, 3♥ would be obviously forcing, too, but that's implying a completely different message about the hand.

[AL78]

I would assume it is forcing absent any specific agreement. It looks to be setting clubs as trumps and expressing slam interest, inviting a cue bidding sequence. 3♥ would be game forcing but fishing for 3NT as a contract. I think you and your partner have to discuss when cue bids of opponents suits are forcing raises, and in the sequence given, what would double mean?

[mikeh]

As in so many cases, how one plays it can be subject to discussion and agreement. Absent such a discussion, here’s how I’d reason:

 

My 2C was forcing one round, but not game forcing. If I hold a full opening bid, then I’m moving over 3C by partner. Btw, possession of Jxx in hearts is a non-issue, since it is reasonable (even if it turns out otherwise) to infer that partner has at most 2 hearts.

 

So partner can bid 3C, invitational, and I can pass it. You call it ‘competitive’ but now we’re arguing semantics. 3C shows a decent hand with clubs, but not enough to insist on game.

 

Logically, 4C can’t send the same message. 4C can be and should be forcing, because with less than game values, but a club fit, he bids 3C

 

As for the argument that all game force raises go through 3H, that’s not a good idea. When he bids 3H, all you know is that he has a good hand. 3H says nothing about clubs. He might, for example, have something like AKQxxx(x) in diamonds,some spade values, and be looking for 3N.or he might hold a monster hand in diamonds and be looking for game/slam in that suit.

 

Were he to bid 3H, and ignoring the possibility of a 4H call on your right,you might be endplayed in the auction. You might bid 4D. Now try to set trump in clubs below game, so as to enable cue bidding to slam!

 

Btw, don’t ever play minorwood. It has to be, imo, the worst slam convention ever invented. Use kickback instead. Then, here, partner could bid 4C to suggest cuebidding or4Has ace-asking (admittedlyone has to decide whether that’s worth giving up the splinter, but I oit is in this sequence.

[johnu]

Btw, don’t ever play minorwood. It has to be, imo, the worst slam convention ever invented. Use kickback instead. Then, here, partner could bid 4C to suggest cuebidding or4Has ace-asking (admittedlyone has to decide whether that’s worth giving up the splinter, but I oit is in this sequence.

I recommend that my opponents play Minorwood. If the opponents trot out Minorwood against me, I compliment them on playing a good convention. I can't play Minorwood myself because I have bone spurs.

[sfi]

One additional point to consider is that if you have a minor suit fit and are invitational, 3NT should be considered your most likely game until proven otherwise. Using 4C as an invite breaks that guideline.

[dokoko]

If 2♣ is the usual 10+ F1 I see no real need to have two NF raises below game. If you have less than a game force just raise to 3♣. Therefore I would play 4♣ as forcing (slammish).

 

That said you should at least have general agreements on minor suit raises. Having a bad agreement usually is better than having none.

[kgr]

As in so many cases, how one plays it can be subject to discussion and agreement. Absent such a discussion, here’s how I’d reason:

 

My 2C was forcing one round, but not game forcing. If I hold a full opening bid, then I’m moving over 3C by partner. Btw, possession of Jxx in hearts is a non-issue, since it is reasonable (even if it turns out otherwise) to infer that partner has at most 2 hearts.

 

So partner can bid 3C, invitational, and I can pass it. You call it ‘competitive’ but now we’re arguing semantics. 3C shows a decent hand with clubs, but not enough to insist on game.

 

Logically, 4C can’t send the same message. 4C can be and should be forcing, because with less than game values, but a club fit, he bids 3C

 

As for the argument that all game force raises go through 3H, that’s not a good idea. When he bids 3H, all you know is that he has a good hand. 3H says nothing about clubs. He might, for example, have something like AKQxxx(x) in diamonds,some spade values, and be looking for 3N.or he might hold a monster hand in diamonds and be looking for game/slam in that suit.

 

Were he to bid 3H, and ignoring the possibility of a 4H call on your right,you might be endplayed in the auction. You might bid 4D. Now try to set trump in clubs below game, so as to enable cue bidding to slam!

 

Btw, don’t ever play minorwood. It has to be, imo, the worst slam convention ever invented. Use kickback instead. Then, here, partner could bid 4C to suggest cuebidding or4Has ace-asking (admittedlyone has to decide whether that’s worth giving up the splinter, but I oit is in this sequence.

..."Absent such a discussion": I agree with all you said.

Do you think it is a bad idea to have 4C being minimal. Something like?: xx=x=AJTxxx=KQxx

[AL78]

..."Absent such a discussion": I agree with all you said.

Do you think it is a bad idea to have 4C being minimal. Something like?: xx=x=AJTxxx=KQxx

 

I'm not convinced it is necessary. Why not bid 3♣ with that hand? If partner has enough that game or slam in clubs or 3NT is a good shot, they are not passing.