Is it forcing Or just bad bidding
#2
Posted 2021-June-28, 04:12
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
#3
Posted 2021-June-28, 05:09
DavidKok, on 2021-June-28, 04:12, said:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
#4
Posted 2021-June-28, 07:11
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
#5
Posted 2021-June-28, 09:34
pilowsky, on 2021-June-28, 03:28, said:
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!
#6
Posted 2021-June-28, 09:43
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).
#7
Posted 2021-June-28, 09:44
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.
This post has been edited by Winstonm: 2021-June-28, 11:32
#8
Posted 2021-June-28, 12:00
DavidKok, on 2021-June-28, 09:43, said:
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.
#9
Posted 2021-June-28, 13:11
LBengtsson, on 2021-June-28, 12:00, said:
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.
#10
Posted 2021-June-28, 15:37
Anyway, I agree with Richard (hrothgar) that you have a choice between X, 2♦ and 3♦. Pass is not really an option.
#11
Posted 2021-June-30, 06:15
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
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#12
Posted 2021-June-30, 08:42
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.
#13
Posted 2021-June-30, 08:56
Winstonm, on 2021-June-28, 09:44, said:
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?
#14
Posted 2021-June-30, 17:49
Gilithin, on 2021-June-30, 08:56, said:
What does partner bid over after my double?
#16
Posted 2021-July-01, 13:39
Gilithin, on 2021-July-01, 13:32, said:
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.)
#17
Posted 2021-July-03, 19:31
If that is the meaning, Jxxxx is suicidal.
Carl
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?