Is it forcing

[pilowsky]

[hv=lin=st%7C%7Cpn%7CDevious,Pilowsky,Crafty,MBP%7Cmd%7C3ST3HK8DAQTCA97642,SA2HJ9654D7632CK8,SQ9874HQT32DJ9C53,SKJ65HA7DK854CQJT%7Csv%7Co%7Crh%7C%7Cah%7CBoard%201%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C1D%7Cmb%7C2C%7Cmb%7C?%7C]300|300|

My partner (much better player: MBP) felt that I had no bid as West.

I'm sure that's true.

But, (always a but) this problem comes up all the time.

The questions are:

When is it right for West to bid 2♥ with this shape? and

When it is right to bid 2♥ as West, is it forcing?

[/hv]

[DavidKok]

1. Most pairs play that 2♥ is forcing here. Choosing to play this as not forcing is called 'negative free bids'. They are somewhat popular, but it is not the default assumption. In other words, this is a matter of partnership agreement.
   
2. The auction 1♦-(2♣)-? is a weak point of a lot of bidding systems. Expert partnerships tend to have separate agreements for precisely this auction, because natural systems perform poorly after this start. In the absence of agreements like this you may have to accept poor results on this auction every now and again.
   
3. I would not bid 2♥ (forcing) on that hand. The forcing bid would guarantee safety in 2NT or on the 3-level, and you are not strong enough for that - even 3♦ is not safe. If your hearts were stronger or your values were more concentrated in the red suits you might stretch to get a bid in, but even then it is important to keep in mind that you are stretching. Arguably this is a symptom of natural systems having a bad time on this auction.
   

[pilowsky]

1. Most pairs play that 2♥ is forcing here. Choosing to play this as not forcing is called 'negative free bids'. They are somewhat popular, but it is not the default assumption. In other words, this is a matter of partnership agreement.
2. The auction 1♦-(2♣)-? is a weak point of a lot of bidding systems. Expert partnerships tend to have separate agreements for precisely this auction, because natural systems perform poorly after this start. In the absence of agreements like this you may have to accept poor results on this auction every now and again.
3. I would not bid 2♥ (forcing) on that hand. The forcing bid would guarantee safety in 2NT or on the 3-level, and you are not strong enough for that - even 3♦ is not safe. If your hearts were stronger or your values were more concentrated in the red suits you might stretch to get a bid in, but even then it is important to keep in mind that you are stretching. Arguably this is a symptom of natural systems having a bad time on this auction.

 

Very helpful, I should have mentioned that we were playing 2/1.

Because I learned 2/1 from GIB some of my calls are a bit - how can I put this politely - antiquated.

Negative free bids are one of them.

And yes, my partner thought it was forcing, settling in 2NT.

What interested me was that this was so common that out of 18 tables this still scored 47.06% (us and one other). Six pairs were in 3NT- a lot with a bunch of 3♦-1 above us.

This spray of contracts and results suggested that this is not an uncommon problem.

[hrothgar]

1. Without discussion, I think that most people would treat 2♥ as forcing.

2. I really dislike passing with your hand

3. I think that you have two reasonable bids available

 

A. X (intending to rebid 3♦ over 2♠)

B. 2♦ (maybe even 3♦)

 

With respect to your original questions:

 

There is nothing wrong with bidding 2♥ with this shape.

The issue involves strength and suit quality

[LBengtsson]

My partner (much better player: MBP) felt that I had no bid as West.

 

Garbage! even if you do not bid ♥ you should support ♦ with 2♦. to deny 4 card support for your partners suit with a A and a K in the other suits is just anti-bridge. yes, partner could have just 3♦ with 2/1 but you take one bad result against the good results of showing support. partner could have a v. good hand. passing and expecting partner to balance as opener could be missed if opps raise to 3♣. your ♣K looks in good place when south bids 2♣. its a bidders game!

[DavidKok]

I think this discussion so far shows precisely how fragile natural bidding is on this auction. hrothgar suggests X then 3♦ (which is not only not a favourite to make, but also permanently buries the fifth heart. Plus it is not unambiguously NF, for example if partner bids 2NT). LBengtsson prefers burying not just the fifth heart but the first four as well.

 

I don't feel strongly about this myself - all of double, 2♦ and pass (and 2♥) have downsides. But I do think it is not a clear call. I would probably pass, hoping that partner can balance. In my own system 1♦ is unbalanced which strongly suggests X then 3♦, but then again with my regular partner X would be conventional (showing hearts, 4+, and not enough strength or shape for 2♥ forcing).

[Winstonm]

I always thought it standard to play a negative double in this auction as either both majors or one major with support for opener's bid suit.

 

I would double.

 

PS: This would be the bottom end of the strength for the double as a consideration is that diamond support comes at the 3-level if partner bids 2S. The position of the club K makes this hand worth a bid, IMO.

Edited June 28, 2021 by Winstonm

[LBengtsson]

LBengtsson prefers burying not just the fifth heart but the first four as well.

 

I do not prefer, David. I just do not want to give partner a bad guess if the opps compete further. 2♦ is a honest bid. X is a good bid but is a little deceit, no ♠ suit. If the north go 3♣ after wests X and partner bids 3♠ you then have to bid 4♦. that is overstatement of values.

[DavidKok]

I do not prefer, David. I just do not want to give partner a bad guess if the opps compete further. 2♦ is a honest bid. X is a good bid but is a little deceit, no ♠ suit. If the north go 3♣ after wests X and partner bids 3♠ you then have to bid 4♦. that is overstatement of values.

That is exactly what I said. Each option has downsides. I fully agree that X can be disastrous, for example on the auction you present. And 2♦ is disastrous if partner has 4 hearts, and possibly also if partner has 3 of them. That is why you have to make a choice between these risky options - a preference, if you will.

[helene_t]

I dunno if negative freebids are common in Australia. My guess would be that they are not since they are not common in New Zealand). In particular, pairs that play strong NT (like you apparently do) tend to play forcing freebids. This may seem backwards since a hand like yours would like just to play 2♥ opposite a balanced 12-14, but presumably the idea is that if you play weak NT you can't afford to pass with a 6-card hearts and 8 points, and then opener has to be able to pass with a 3154 11-count.

 

Anyway, I agree with Richard (hrothgar) that you have a choice between X, 2♦ and 3♦. Pass is not really an option.

[P_Marlowe]

#1 What is wrong with X?

If partner bids 2S, you can correct to 3D.

#2 Even if 2H is nonforcing, which I usually play, I would not do it, due to the quality of the suit.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[mycroft]

What is wrong with double? People haven't learned *all* of negative doubles, and think they need both majors after 1♦-2♣. Everyone's been there - I got caught once too. Of course, it was pre-2000...

 

If you don't know, or don't realize, or have a partner that won't understand X-then-3♦, well, that's the trouble with double.

[Gilithin]

I always thought it standard to play a negative double in this auction as either both majors or one major with support for opener's bid suit.

So with a weak 2821 you would pass? The most common treatment I know is "weak with 1 major, or (at least) 2 places to play". As has already been mentioned there are better methods around but for some reason hardly anyone at club level plays any of them. To those for whom 1♦ - (2♣) - X - (P)// 2♠ - P - 3♦ is weak, how would you instead bid an invitational hand with 4 hearts and diamond support?

[Winstonm]

So with a weak 2821 you would pass? The most common treatment I know is "weak with 1 major, or (at least) 2 places to play". As has already been mentioned there are better methods around but for some reason hardly anyone at club level plays any of them. To those for whom 1♦ - (2♣) - X - (P)// 2♠ - P - 3♦ is weak, how would you instead bid an invitational hand with 4 hearts and diamond support?

What does partner bid over after my double?

[Gilithin]

What does partner bid over after my double?

1♦ - (2♣) - X - (P)// 2♠, as per the auction in the quote.

[Winstonm]

1♦ - (2♣) - X - (P)// 2♠, as per the auction in the quote.

Then I bid 3d. Partner knows my range from this bid - it is in the 9-11 range because I wouldn’t make this type negative double with less,

 

You make an error describing this bid as ‘weak’. It is not. If I plan to prefer back to diamonds over a major response I have to hold compensating values. (Note my initial response in this thread. I said I consider the posted hand a minimum for the double.)

[bluenikki]

"Non-forcing" has many possible meanings. The most useful (in my opinion) for competitive auctions is that partner passes only with BOTH minimum strength AND a misfit for the suit.

 

If that is the meaning, Jxxxx is suicidal.

 

Carl