[diana_eva]

What would you do as East?

---

Spoiler

If you pass, partner argues that his pass was forcing.

Assume you do somehow realize pass is meant to be forcing, what will you do then? (I have no idea what a forcing pass would mean here so any comments on that would be appreciated, from those who would assume FP)

[sfi]

Pass, 100%.

Spoiler

Partner's claim that this is forcing is just silly. If my partners played this as forcing, I could bid 5H on good hands to guarantee an improved score.

If it were forcing, I can't see any reason not to double again. But pass is clear IRL.

[mr1303]

Q. Do I have anything at all that I didn't show with my initial double?

A. No.

Q. Is there any reason from partner's bidding that suggests I have to do something here?

A. No. Partner couldn't open the bidding or do anything over opponents' 5H bid.

Therefore I pass.

[the hog]

Of course you can pass.

[jgillispie]

 diana_eva, on 2014-January-28, 17:13, said:

What would you do as East?

---

Spoiler

If you pass, partner argues that his pass was forcing.

Assume you do somehow realize pass is meant to be forcing, what will you do then? (I have no idea what a forcing pass would mean here so any comments on that would be appreciated, from those who would assume FP)

Pass by your partner cannot be forcing. He has limited his hand to 12 HCP. Dealer is limited to 12 HCP. So, either you or opener has a stack of points (or dealer miscounted).

If you (as doubler) have a motherload of HCP, then you will make some intelligent bid when it comes back to you. If opener has points, he is either A: Bidding 6 or B: Passing, hoping slam is unreachable

Simply put, if partner's pass would be forcing, then it would be a very silly way to play it. Pass just shows no desire to compete at the five level opposite a typical X in this auction.

[karlson]

It's not uncommon to play this pass as forcing (when a passed hand raises a preempt to the 5-level). I got the idea from these forums, and have the agreement with several partners. Arguably you could play it even at the 4-level. Essentially pass acts kind of like a responsive double (not sure what to do), and double would be a stronger defensive suggestion.

I would double on this hand since I have a minimum and non-extreme shape.

I assume the people who commented that this is a silly and exploitable agreement didn't realize the 5♥ bidder was a passed hand. It's hard to have a lock for 11 tricks opposite a third seat preempt as a passed hand.

[sfi]

 karlson, on 2014-January-28, 20:11, said:

I assume the people who commented that this is a silly and exploitable agreement didn't realize the 5♥ bidder was a passed hand. It's hard to have a lock for 11 tricks opposite a third seat preempt as a passed hand.

Concerning silly:
Having the pass be forcing means we are committing ourselves to action at a level where it's not at all clear whether we should be doing so. Game in hearts may be the normal result and we can no longer achieve that.

Concerning exploitable:
No - I just don't believe your agreements are going to be sophisticated enough to distinguish between the times when your opponent is a passed hand and when they're not. If they do, I am impressed.

[helene_t]

As Karlsson says we have had this discussion before. Everyone said that of course it is nf until justin weighted in and changed everybody's mind. Anyway I think it is quite clear that pass is forcing. Lho tginks we are going to make the wrong slam decision. I don't think so. Defending will probably be right

[PhilKing]

 sfi, on 2014-January-28, 21:03, said:

Concerning exploitable:
No - I just don't believe your agreements are going to be sophisticated enough to distinguish between the times when your opponent is a passed hand and when they're not. If they do, I am impressed.

I've had this in my agreements since the early 90's, though it has never made a difference.

[diana_eva]

 helene_t, on 2014-January-29, 02:16, said:

As Karlsson says we have had this discussion before. Everyone said that of course it is nf until justin weighted in and changed everybody's mind. Anyway I think it is quite clear that pass is forcing. Lho tginks we are going to make the wrong slam decision. I don't think so. Defending will probably be right

I missed that discussion, but the reason I posted this question is that it's been asked by my partner too over at bridgewinners and a number of high profile players answered that for them this would be indeed a forcing pass situation. I tend to trust their overall experience more than my gut feeling of "how can this be forcing"

The real deal at the table was easier. I had one king more and doubled 5H, not knowing that my pd had alerted pass as forcing. He had a 9-10 po hand with 5 spades and lots of quacks. Opps went down 2 on a misplay, they could have easily kept it to -1. 5S would go down too, but we would have made 4S.

So what options are there for the doubler over a FP understood as such? Can doubler bid 5S or something else on a 4 carder? When should he do so?

If advancer pulls the second x to 5S, after passing 5H, would that show slam interest?

[helene_t]

Yes, normally the difference between direct 5♠ and pass followed by 5♠ is that the slow route is stronger. Here is might be better to use the distinction to find the best fit as we haven't found it yet. Something like: direct 5♠ shows five, pass followed by 5♠ shows four spades and a longer minor. Obviously it has to be pretty extreme to do this. With a singleton hearts I would normally either double myself, or pass partner's double. So I will probably have a void when I bid 5♠.

[Cyberyeti]

I can see why partner might consider his pass forcing in that basically with everybody else denying a decent hand, it's very unlikely you hold a hand as bad as the one you actually do, but I think they're wrong. It depends to some extent how conservatively you and the opps open, I can't visualise a hand opposite that WE wouldn't open that offers good play for 5♠ where partner wouldn't bid it directly, and would pass in a heartbeat.

[Vampyr]

 Cyberyeti, on 2014-January-29, 08:39, said:

I can see why partner might consider his pass forcing in that basically with everybody else denying a decent hand, it's very unlikely you hold a hand as bad as the one you actually do, but I think they're wrong. It depends to some extent how conservatively you and the opps open, I can't visualise a hand opposite that WE wouldn't open that offers good play for 5♠ where partner wouldn't bid it directly, and would pass in a heartbeat.

So we should pass even if pass is forcing? Nice argument; I think you are right.

[sfi]

Everyone is assuming that 2H is actually a weak hand, but third seat weak openings are more variable. Maybe opener wanted to make it harder for their LHO to bid spades, so chose 2H when they would have opened at the one level in 1st and 2nd seat. Here's a similar example from a recent national tournament:

Nil vul.

x
Jx
QJTx
AKQxxx

After 2 passes I tried 3C. LHO with 5413 shape made a normal overcall of 3S and played it there with a 6-1 break. It turns out that both sides can make 11 tricks - them in hearts and us in clubs, so we didn't achieve the par contract. But the team picked up 7 and should have picked up 12 except for a very strange decision at the other table.

The moral is that just because 3rd seat made a "weak" opening bid and their partner suggested that they don't want you to play in 4S, it doesn't have to be our hand. They have a big fit and their values are still unclear.

[diana_eva]

My thinking is along the same lines - even if they are preemptor + passed hand, that is not enough to determine that we are in FP and they must be punished for stealing from us.

While I see that there might be a method to play FP in such a situation (which probably makes even more sense if we're red vs white for instance), it doesn't seem to gain much overall since doubler is left to guess a lot and is more likely to guess wrong than advancer. IMO a take out x conveys enough info about the shape and strength for advancer to be able to do something intelligent, instead of passing the ball back to his partner who has zero info about what advancer might hold (except that he wasn't able to open, which doesn't make the decision any easier).

[P_Marlowe]

Given that p is a passed hand, you know, you dont have sure
game, hence you can pass.
The 2H in 3rd can be wide ranging.

If p would not be a passed hand, you have to treat his pass as
forcing, and X.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Trinidad]

There are good reasons to play this as forcing.... But it only is forcing if you both agreed to play it as forcing. Until then, partner's argument is indeed silly.

Rik

[Cyberyeti]

 Vampyr, on 2014-January-29, 10:30, said:

So we should pass even if pass is forcing? Nice argument; I think you are right.

No, I said I don't think it's forcing, but I could see why partner might think it was (effectively our hand is the reason it isn't, but partner never considered we could have a hand that bad). Even if partner wanted it to be forcing, I think pass is probably correct opposite anything WE couldn't open, that may not be true for people who open more conservatively than we do.

[diana_eva]

After an excruciating fight with my pride I decided that pd was right and we shd play FP in this sequence.