[sceptic]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 2♥    Pass  3♦    Pass
 Pass  3♠    5♦    Pass
 Pass  Pass  

[Walddk]

2♥ - 3♦*
4♦ - 6♦
P

Is a practical approach. Yes, I missed a lay down grand slam on this layout, but I am not worried about it.

* New suit by responder after a pre-empt should be a one round force. RONF = Raise Only Non Forcing, e.g. 2♥ - 3♥ can (should) be passed.

Roland

[ArcLight]

I have a simpler question -
Why did West pass his/her pards forcing 3♦ bid?

A new suit by responder is forcing and frequently is looking for game or slam.
Its not an attempt to improve the contract.

[jtfanclub]

ArcLight, on Aug 16 2006, 07:46 AM, said:

I have a simpler question -
Why did West pass his/her pards forcing 3♦ bid?

A new suit by responder is forcing and frequently is looking for game or slam.
Its not an attempt to improve the contract.

Let's suppose that you're playing that it isn't forcing. Still, why would you pass it? You have a doubleton honor in your partner's suit and a max. If it were merely invitational, why would you decline?

1st or 2nd hand, I'm going to open this guy 1♥, which makes it a lot easier to find. I've got 10 hcp, a 6 card suit, and two tens where they're likely to do some good. Good enough for me.

[ArcLight]

>Let's suppose that you're playing that it isn't forcing. Still, why would you pass it? You have a doubleton honor in your partner's suit and a max. If it were merely invitational, why would you decline?

The standard is it is forcing. The poster was not using an unsual system (I don't think). If you have an agreement that its not forcing, it should be posted, because its not what people expect. Same for a pair using Penalty Doubles insted of Takeout Doubles.

[whereagles]

These hands are very, very hard to bid. Don't worry if you didn't get to the top spot.

Still, Wald's sequence is good and does get the job done. However, I'm not sure how many would be disciplined enough to bid 4♦ over 3♦

[mikeh]

Roland's sequence is pretty good. It can be improved upon if you have the agreement that 4♣ by west, over 3♦, is a cuebid: showing a maximum weak 2 with good ♦ support (Qx is excellent support in this auction) and a ♣ control.

It is not clear that this would allow the partnership to reach the grand with confidence, and it must be admitted that I would not take the cue as promising a high card control: it might well be a stiff... however, it shows a maximum while 4♦ shows the support while denying a maximum (with a biddable side control).

[kenrexford]

Extending out step three of an improving sequence:

2♥ - P - 3♦ - P -
4♣ - P(presumable) - 4♠ (RKCB for diamonds) - P -
4NT (0 key cards) - P - 5♣ (Queen ask) - P -
5♥ (heart King, diamond Queen) - P - 6♣ (was 4♣ a King?) - P -
6♥ (yes, and I have the heart Queen) - P - 7♦!!!

[mikeh]

kenrexford, on Aug 16 2006, 02:54 PM, said:

Extending out step three of an improving sequence:

2♥ - P - 3♦ - P -
4♣ - P(presumable) - 4♠ (RKCB for diamonds) - P -
4NT (0 key cards) - P - 5♣ (Queen ask) - P -
5♥ (heart King, diamond Queen) - P - 6♣ (was 4♣ a King?) - P -
6♥ (yes, and I have the heart Queen) - P - 7♣.

Not an an improvement: better than 7N or 7♠, but not even as good as 6♦

[kenrexford]

Oops. I suppose 7♣ does have some play problems.



Wise-ass!!! LOL

[neilkaz]

RONF isn't played by all that many non North Americans from what I've experienced, and also isn't played by some of my typical 2/1 PD's.

With that in mind, I can bid 2NT and once PD shows me his club feature (I much prefer feature to Ogust), I then bid 3D after catching a 4D raise, it should be easy to reach a slam.

I also prefer RONF to the silliness of trying to improve the contract or bidding 3H invitational, for example.

.. neilkaz ..

[Wackojack]

I have noticed that many players of intermediate level and below, play a takeout response of a weak 2M as an attempt to improve the contract and so of course non-forcing. Then last week watching the European championships on viewgraph, I noticed its use like this. I cannot remember which team. Prior to that in a f2f game we had a bad result when I passed with a void in partners suit, opps had no game on, and I had a moderate hand with 7 diamonds. My partner wasn't happy that I insisted that the new suit take out was a forcing bid. After seeing the vugraph I conceded to this particular partner that I would play the new suit as an attempt to improve the contract (if she wanted) in the Brighton mixed pairs. 2nt the only forcing bid.

[whereagles]

Wacko, if you're going to play undisciplined weak 2s, you need to adjust the response scheme to it.

As you've already noticed from experience, there are several occasions where responder would like to try and improve the contract. That calls for new stuff like new suit = non forcing, or transfers after weak 2s.

[keylime]

Some might open 1♥ with this hand, but I liked the disciplined 2 bid.

With that said, I'm of the school that new bids are forcing unless a raise for three reasons:

1) Playing new suits NF without any tweaks demands that all your inquiries go through 2NT. When 4th seat takes a call, i.e. 2H-P-2NT-3D, you lose the ability to show the true nature of your hand, i.e a natural forcing call in spades. I've also of strong mind about how saving pard from their preempt puts you into another 6-1 from your first 6-1 fit. That, and I get double happy when this happens on certain hands...

2) Playing new suit forcing is easier on the p'ship. Knowing that 2H-2S is 100% percent forcing makes 2NT inquiries easier to digest.

3) When I was in Nanaimo, my friends Angela and Allan Ferguson showed me a two step mechanism:

Over 2H:
2S = feature
2NT = shortage

(nota bene: this might be interchanged)

Over 2S:
2NT = feature
3C = shortage

I found that this with new suits NF was somewhat playable to a point.

[whereagles]

keylime, on Aug 25 2006, 07:53 AM, said:

1) I've also of strong mind about how saving pard from their preempt puts you into another 6-1 from your first 6-1 fit. That, and I get double happy when this happens on certain hands...

3) When I was in Nanaimo, my friends Angela and Allan Ferguson showed me a two step mechanism: (...) I found that this with new suits NF was somewhat playable to a point.

1) You don't save pard from his suit if you know he has 6 cards. It is when you play 5 card weak 2s that some sort of contract improvement mechanism is needed. Playing the 5-1 fit when a 6-3 is available (albeit a level higher) will lead to bad scores.

3) I played new suit NF over 5-card weak 2s for quite a while and found it quite unplayable in the long run. Not to mention having to bid 2NT with any strong hand was horrible, unless you had a fit.

I could come up with only one solution: transfers. That's a two-way mechanism that works fine with both weak and stong hands. Doesn't work with all suits at the 3 level, but it does get the job done properly for some, while keeping precision with huge hands.