Forcing or not?
#1
Posted 2008-June-08, 14:00
1♠ - 1NT (forcing or not, your pref.)
2NT - 3♣/♦/♥
Do you play this as forcing or not? I heard some play it as not forcing if a minor, but 3♥ forcing. What about you? Does your partner agree?
#3
Posted 2008-June-08, 14:19
never though about it, but according to our systemic
agreement, it should / would be forcing.
We play weak jump shifts (4-7) and one suiter which
go via a forcing NT 8-10, hence after a bid which would
show something like 16-18 the bid has to be forcing, ...
With kind regards
Marlowe
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#4
Posted 2008-June-08, 14:36
Mike
#5
Posted 2008-June-09, 02:31
Because of the rest of my methods 2NT is always balanced, never 5422 or 6322 which helps.
In an Acol-style context where 1NT is about 5-9 I play these as non-forcing as any decent 6-card minor / 5-card heart suit would have strained to make a 2/1 on the first round.
#6
Posted 2008-June-09, 05:26
FrancesHinden, on Jun 9 2008, 09:31 AM, said:
You ought to play transfers then. The downside of transfers is that you can't play in 3♣, but if everything's forcing you can't do that anyway.
#7
Posted 2008-June-09, 06:57
- hrothgar
#8
Posted 2008-June-09, 07:15
gnasher, on Jun 9 2008, 12:26 PM, said:
FrancesHinden, on Jun 9 2008, 09:31 AM, said:
You ought to play transfers then. The downside of transfers is that you can't play in 3♣, but if everything's forcing you can't do that anyway.
Actually I think the answer is to make 2NT artificial and stick 18-19 balanced in the 2C bid. But that's a different discussion.
And we've added so much new system in the last year we're having a temporary embargo while it all beds down.
#9
Posted 2008-June-09, 08:15
#10
Posted 2008-June-11, 15:03
#11
Posted 2008-June-11, 15:07
2NT as artificial -- check
2♣ to handle all tweener hands -- check (plus a lot of creative 2NT openings)
But, if natural (ugh!)...
Transfers -- check (just changed recently)
-P.J. Painter.
#12
Posted 2008-June-11, 16:16
While transfers obviously help you on the hands where you want to sign off in a suit (you can't do this if suit bids are forcing) they actually make things more difficult on some slammish hands. Besides 3♣ (where you are most of a level lower than 3♠ transfer to clubs), it is also the case that opener usually has a cheap cuebid and responder often doesn't. So if you want to look for slam in diamonds (say) provided that opener has the right hand, playing transfers you will see:
3♣ transfer
3♦ forced
3NT (slam try; else would bid 3NT direct)
four-level cuebid by opener if he likes diamonds; else pass
Whereas without transfers:
3♦ (natural forcing)
three-level cuebid by opener if he likes diamonds (save many steps!) else 3NT
Of course, I do like to play gazzilli also, which nicely removes the NF hands from the equation (strong 2NT rebid hands go via 1M-1N-2♣-2♦-2NT which is already a GF sequence; without enough for game responder breaks the 2♣ puppet).
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#13
Posted 2008-June-12, 01:47
#14
Posted 2008-June-12, 02:03
#15
Posted 2008-June-12, 05:05
twcho, on Jun 12 2008, 03:03 AM, said:
Yes, I know. I play it myself.
#16
Posted 2008-June-12, 13:52
Then 3♣=a 5-card minor, 3♦=4-card hearts, 3♥=5-card, 3♠=♠Hx, 3NT=55m. With some 3♣ also include 6-card hearts.
Harald

Help
