QGame
#1
Posted 2015-February-26, 10:35
Many years ago, I attempted (unsuccessfully) to learn Ultimate Club, the relay system played by Ron Rubin, Matt Granovetter and Mike Becker in the late 70s and early 80s. In the book setting out the system, there was a concept of QGame, and bids that were forcing to QGame. QGame meant 3NT or 4 of the agreed suit. So, if the agreed suit was a minor suit, "game forcing" sequences were forcing to 4 of the minor.
In the thread that developed after my post, all of the posters assumed that if you were playing 2/1, then a sequence that starts out 1♥ - 2♣ was absolutely game forcing - meaning that the auction could not end in 4 of a minor. For example, many posters flat out stated that, in 2/1 GF, the sequence 1♥ - 2♣ - 3♣ - 4♣ was 100% forcing and was a slam try.
Is that opinion universally held? Is it absolutely clear that the 4♣ bid is forcing? Clearly, if the bidding sequence were 1♠ - 2♥ - 3♥ - 4♥, the last bid is a signoff. Of course, 4♥ is game, and 4♣ is not game. But it is QGame.
EDITED to change 1♦-2♣ to 1♥-2♣.
#2
Posted 2015-February-26, 10:41
As for
1♦-2♣
3♣-4♣,
assuming that 2♣ and 3♣ were both forcing but not GF, I think PhilKing has a nice general principle that says you can sign off in 4m if you first made a try for 3NT (by bidding some other suit at the 3-level after 3♣), but the given sequence is a slam try.
My personal opinion, fwiw, is that 1NT becomes a bit overloaded if everything else (except for natural raises) are GF, so probably the jump shifts (possibly also the 2NT response) should not be Bergen or SJS but be used to unload the 1NT response.
#3
Posted 2015-February-26, 10:48
Now the benefits of that are quite high - 5m is much more difficult to make on moderate values than 4 of a suit, especially when we already know that there's a suit that will lose all the cards we have in it (and we've likely told the opponents what suit that is). The downsides are the same as all "almost GF" calls - sometimes you can't make the correct call, because it's passable, so you have to lie about your hand; and unless the sequences are *carefully* delineated, you will have "I thought it wasn't passable because..." auctions. Both of those can be just as zeroing at MPs as a hopeless, but forced 5m, and tend to lose double digits instead of the 5 or 6 you win back for +130 into -50/100. So it's a balance of probabilities, as is almost everything in the auction.
Around here, they play "a 2/1 is GF, any 2/1, no exceptions, get to Game" at least short of the absolute top rank. It's easier, at least - and at least around here, they have field protection for their "hopeless 5m"s and their "I don't have a bid for my 1=3=3=6 10 count" after 1♦ and their buried heart fits after 1♠.
#4
Posted 2015-February-26, 11:21
mycroft, on 2015-February-26, 10:48, said:
Now the benefits of that are quite high - 5m is much more difficult to make on moderate values than 4 of a suit, especially when we already know that there's a suit that will lose all the cards we have in it (and we've likely told the opponents what suit that is). The downsides are the same as all "almost GF" calls - sometimes you can't make the correct call, because it's passable, so you have to lie about your hand; and unless the sequences are *carefully* delineated, you will have "I thought it wasn't passable because..." auctions. Both of those can be just as zeroing at MPs as a hopeless, but forced 5m, and tend to lose double digits instead of the 5 or 6 you win back for +130 into -50/100. So it's a balance of probabilities, as is almost everything in the auction.
Around here, they play "a 2/1 is GF, any 2/1, no exceptions, get to Game" at least short of the absolute top rank. It's easier, at least - and at least around here, they have field protection for their "hopeless 5m"s and their "I don't have a bid for my 1=3=3=6 10 count" after 1♦ and their buried heart fits after 1♠.
Sorry - the sequence in my other thread was 1♥ - 2♣, not 1♦ - 2♣. I edited my first post in this thread to change it.
#5
Posted 2015-February-26, 11:39
#6
Posted 2015-February-26, 13:01
#7
Posted 2015-February-26, 18:18
#8
Posted 2015-February-26, 18:35
1♠-2♥-2♠-3♣-3♠
1♠-2♣-2♥-3♣-3♥-4♣
In the second auction, responder has ♠xx ♥Kx ♦Qx ♣AKJTxxx or similar. Obviously, it does not have to end the auction.
The "rule" is that someone bids a suit 3 times and neither player has bid 2NT.
#9
Posted 2015-February-27, 02:36
My experience is that the advantages of these exceptions are in the end balanced by their disadvantages.
What all these exceptions do is to complicate a simple concept for little gain and these exceptions hamper your slam bidding.
Exceptions also tend to produce misunderstandings. I like the feeling knowing this bid can not be passed and there is no post mortem discussion about it.
Also I do not like to stop on a dime. I am rather be a little bit more conservative when holding a minor suit oriented hand
Rainer Herrmann
#10
Posted 2015-March-20, 08:40
It's quite interesting where you get into the situation where you are probably forced to make a call that is losing long term to preserve partnership trust (if you pass 4m and partner was looking for slam he won't talk to you for a week).
#11
Posted 2015-March-20, 16:25
The exceptions, where 4m can be passed in a GF auction might be:
1) 4m can be passed in a failed stopper ask auction.
2) 4m can be passed when it is an escape from 3NTX.
IMHO, these two exceptions might be worthwhile, any others are quite likely to be a mistake.
#12
Posted 2015-March-21, 02:45
PhilKing, on 2015-February-26, 18:35, said:
1♠-2♥-2♠-3♣-3♠
1♠-2♣-2♥-3♣-3♥-4♣
In the second auction, responder has ♠xx ♥Kx ♦Qx ♣AKJTxxx or similar. Obviously, it does not have to end the auction.
The "rule" is that someone bids a suit 3 times and neither player has bid 2NT.
nonexpert here but:
1) auction one could pard not open a very sound weak 2 bid or 3bid or pass?
2) If pard is that weak in hcp could they not pass or open a verysound weak 2bid if 6 cards? tht makes auction 2 stronger, much stronger.
1s=2c
2s weaker
---
1s=2c=2h=stronger
----
pass even weaker.
granted this makes low hcp with dist hands an issue that pard must know.
#13
Posted 2015-March-21, 06:24
mike777, on 2015-March-21, 02:45, said:
1) auction one could pard not open a very sound weak 2 bid or 3bid or pass?
2) If pard is that weak in hcp could they not pass or open a verysound weak 2bid if 6 cards? tht makes auction 2 stronger, much stronger.
1s=2c
2s weaker
---
1s=2c=2h=stronger
----
pass even weaker.
granted this makes low hcp with dist hands an issue that pard must know.
I did not intend to say or imply that anyone had a low point count. Take the second auction: say you have:
♠AQ9xx
♥Kxxxx
♦Kx
♣x
What do you think you can make? Partner has no major fit and does not have a slam try in clubs (he can jump to 4♣ over 2♥).
♠K
♥Qx
♦Jxx
♣AQJ9xxxx
You need some luck to make four. And if partner is stronger, but without enough to jump to 4♣ on the second round he can bid five now.
#14
Posted 2015-March-21, 17:36
1s=2c
2h=3c(nf)
or
1s=2c
2h=2s(nf)
of course this means we are not playing 2/1gf.
Of course this is rather old fashion bidding but seems playable with agreement.