Forcing Calls After Partner's Non-Jump Overcall

[awm]

What rules do people have about forcing calls after partner's overcall? I noticed recently that GIB doesn't seem to play many (any?) of these as forcing, which is different from what I do in my regular partnerships (in general I play new suit as forcing opposite partner's overcall subject to a small number of exceptions).

 

The examples are chosen such that I don't think many people play them as transfers or any other artificial treatment, but feel free to comment if you do play them that way.

[helene_t]

Someone said (was it Justin?) that a new suit is not forcing when both opps bid, unless they preempt.

 

And I like nonforcing shifts to 1-level overcalls (as the overcall is wide ranging).

 

Opposite a 2-level overcall, if opps don't interfere (or if they preempt), I prefer Switch or Rubin Advances whenever it makes sense, but assuming (for the purpose of this poll) that we play natural methods, I think I prefer forcing advances. Maybe it should ideally depend on vulnerability (or even scoring), as it's possible that it is a better style to play the 2-level overcalls wide-ranging when nonvulnerable and/or at matchpoints. Although not quite as wide-ranging as 1-level overcalls, I suppose.

[Zelandakh]

In the UK it is standard to play that all new suit advances are forcing, all direct raises non-forcing, NT advances one level below after an opening bid and a cue as a good raise. American influence means that some enterprising pairs have switched over to non-forcing advances in certain situations, and a tiny number might play transfer advances, but the standard approach is the one you will see pretty much everywhere and it works well enough that I have personally not yet had a partner with whom I have played anything else, even when we were playing Strong Club relay methods for unopposed auctions.

[gordontd]

In the UK it is standard to play that all new suit advances are forcing,

 

That's not my impression, though I'm prepared to be shown to be wrong. I think it's quite common for two-level advances to be non-forcing but constructive.

[jwccsllc]

What rules do people have about forcing calls after partner's overcall? I noticed recently that GIB doesn't seem to play many (any?) of these as forcing, which is different from what I do in my regular partnerships (in general I play new suit as forcing opposite partner's overcall subject to a small number of exceptions).

 

The examples are chosen such that I don't think many people play them as transfers or any other artificial treatment, but feel free to comment if you do play them that way.

 

I prefer transfer advances after we overcall as described here. Transfers allow Advancer to bid again after the transfer is accepted and describe their hand.

[Douglas43]

This is a question with no single standard answer and may be influenced by your overcalling style. I play a fairly down the middle style (7-16hcp, decent suit) but more cautious than most at the two level. It also depends on whether it is your first turn to bid.

 

I normally play a new suit on my first turn as constructive, and with either tolerance for a return to partner's suit, or such a good suit that it can be bid again, but not 100% forcing. To force I would cue bid (with support) or jump shift [1♣ ] -1♥ -[no] 2♠

 

If already passed, a new suit is usually lead directing, with support. For example, holding Qxx, xxx, AKJx, xxx

 

Pass - (1♣) -2♥ - (Dble)

3♦ etc

 

On this hand partner had AKxxxxx, so didn't need to avoid a heart lead against the eventual 3S, but the choice of switch at trick 3 was crucial and dummy had put down ♦Q10xxx, so the right switch was not easy to find

 

I have a letter from Boris Schapiro written back in the early 80's, in response a question about an item Mr Schapiro had written, asking whether a 2♥ advance should not be forcing. He replied that on this occasion it would work but it was not standard. (Gordon, if you would like this for the EBU library please let me know).

 

Oh, and please don't bother with posts about Mr Schapiro and the heart suit...

[Zelandakh]

Oh, and please don't bother with posts about Mr Schapiro and the heart suit...

I'll be sure to keep my fingers clear of that one.

[Cyberyeti]

That's not my impression, though I'm prepared to be shown to be wrong. I think it's quite common for two-level advances to be non-forcing but constructive.

 

Always played it as forcing even before I played the style of overcalls I now do where it's self evidently forcing as we respond basically as if we opened rather than overcalled.

[gordontd]

Always played it as forcing even before I played the style of overcalls I now do where it's self evidently forcing as we respond basically as if we opened rather than overcalled.

 

I'm sure you will understand I'm not being rude if I say that I don't think the way you do something is indicative of what is standard in the UK :)

[AL78]

I have always understood changes of suit opposite an overcall are forcing for one round unless it is by a passed hand. They are forcing opposite an opening bid, so why not make them forcing opposite an overcall, the HCP range is similar, about a king lighter in strength than an opening if at the one level. If you play cue bids of opener's suit as a good raise, you need a way to show a hand with possible game aspirations with a good suit, but no support for partner.

[AL78]

A quick Google search suggests that there isn't really a standard way, it comes down to agreement as to whether a new suit response is forcing, constructive but non forcing, or weak with a long suit and can't stand partner's suit.