[Stephen Tu]

---

2♣ = either 10+ with diamond support, or to make a forcing call in another suit (1M would have been non-forcing).
What do you choose, and how close is it? What card do you upgrade/downgrade before you change your call?

[mgoetze]

I've never played 1M nonforcing, what are the advantages of that style? Also why wouldn't you just use 2M as the forcing call, this 2♣ bid seems overloaded.

It occurs to me that switching 1♥ and 1♠ in this auction is probably a very good idea.

Anyway, I choose 3NT. It's fairly close, I suppose, turning one of the queens into a jack might be enough to get me to bid 2NT instead.

[silvr bull]

I prefer 2NT because my D suit is not better than partner would expect and my strength is in the other suits. If I jump to 3NT instead, partner might have a difficult call holding Kxxx AJxxxx Ax x. I would hate to be in 3NT opposite that, especially if the opening leader has five Cs to the KJ. If partner bids 3S or 3D after my 2NT, I will bid 3NT. If partner bids 3H instead, I will que the SA.

[aguahombre]

2N here= not a downgrade, but rather a decent (not maximum) hand in my original 10-17 range. But, maybe that's just a preference of style. Partner could have g.f. with only 5 hearts or 5 spades...these hands, in addition to the normal limit+ hands with Diamond support, would have cue'd. The J.S. advance is reserved for a 6+ card suit in my sphere.

Side note: 3C would have been a mixed raise by advancer...Western cues give the West a bad name, IMO.

[PhilKing]

It's definitely not close - I bid 2NT in case partner is about to bid, for instance, a forcing 3♥.

I don't see how 2NT can be passed here.

[helene_t]

 mgoetze, on 2015-February-16, 21:19, said:

I've never played 1M nonforcing, what are the advantages of that style? Also why wouldn't you just use 2M as the forcing call, this 2♣ bid seems overloaded.

I don't think the 2♣ bid is overloaded unless opener preempts us, and even if he does bid 3♣ which is passed back to advancer, we should be ok although it will be a bit unclear how much diamond support a double by advancer now has. 4=4=2=3 is possible, probably also 5=4=1=3 and 4=3=3=3.

The forum trend is to play very wide ranging 1-level overcalls so a nonforcing 1♥ is nice in case overcaller has Qxx-xx-KQxxx-xxx.

[rmnka447]

2 NT. You do have a ♣ stopper and an "opening" hand. The first responsibility is to let partner that you have an opener with a descriptive bid other than 2 ♦. If you held something like ♠ AQx ♥ KQ10 ♦ Kxxxx ♣ xx, then 3 ♣ could be used to show the opening values.

Take away the ♠ A or otherwise weaken the hand to below an opener and your rebid would be 2 ♦. Not ideal to be sure on Kxxxx, but certainly defines your values.

By bidding 2 NT, you keep a potential ♥ contract in play when partner cued to show a forcing hand with ♥s.

[Free]

2NT if it's forcing, otherwise blame the methods and bid 3NT to avoid missing game...

[Fluffy]

2NT if forcing, 3♣ otherwise.

[Phil]

If this is matchpoints I don't like the idea that 2N must be forcing.

[aguahombre]

 Phil, on 2015-February-18, 15:20, said:

If this is matchpoints I don't like the idea that 2N must be forcing.

Why do we need to characterize it at all, as forcing or non-forcing? Advancer has cuebid, for whatever reason, and we are bidding 2NT to show a hand which we are proud to call decent opening-bid strength with a stopper in the real opening bidder's alleged suit.

[gwnn]

 aguahombre, on 2015-February-18, 16:53, said:

Why do we need to characterize it at all, as forcing or non-forcing?

Can you really think of no reasons why people want to know whether their bids are forcing or not forcing?

[Zelandakh]

It seems to me that the only way for this system to work is for 2NT to be GF and 2♦ to essentially cover all of the non-GF hands. Even this is not going to be a bed of roses if, for example, partner now rebids 3♠. Quite frankly though, given the non-standard system I would have expected the OP to contain some agreements rather than have us all guess.

[aguahombre]

 gwnn, on 2015-February-18, 17:38, said:

Can you really think of no reasons why people want to know whether their bids are forcing or not forcing?

This is the same as an opening bid and a 2NT rebid for the purposes of discussion. The 2NT rebid shows 18-19 HCP, and it is responder's problem whether he had a real response or not. Describing the 2NT rebid as forcing in this or that case is not necessary. Only the ranges are different in the two scenarios.

Responder's next bid needs to be defined as forcing or non-forcing, however.

[Cyberyeti]

Am I the only person who thinks with all these intermediates this was a 15-17 1N overcall ?

What's the minimum for the forcing call in another suit ?

[PhilKing]

 Cyberyeti, on 2015-February-18, 18:49, said:

Am I the only person who thinks with all these intermediates this was a 15-17 1N overcall ?

Since the hand only becomes worth a good fifteen if partner has a diamond fit, I would hope the answer was yes.

[mgoetze]

 Cyberyeti, on 2015-February-18, 18:49, said:

Am I the only person who thinks with all these intermediates this was a 15-17 1N overcall ?

What's the minimum for the forcing call in another suit ?

15-17? Gosh, what do you do with 18?

You can upgrade your 1NT openers all you like but a r/w 1NT overcall is not exactly the same thing.

[gszes]

3c

I am not overly happy with either my club nor spade stop(s). Advancer is unlimited
and our potential targets range from 3n to 4h to possibly even 6d. I would have preferred
to be able to bid 2h but since that is taken as natural I am forced to show my game forcing
attitude yet concern for NT. Advancer can show stops up the line and who knows where we might
end up. Arbitrarily choosing some number of NT just does not do this hand justice.

[gwnn]

 aguahombre, on 2015-February-18, 18:31, said:

This is the same as an opening bid and a 2NT rebid for the purposes of discussion. The 2NT rebid shows 18-19 HCP, and it is responder's problem whether he had a real response or not. Describing the 2NT rebid as forcing in this or that case is not necessary. Only the ranges are different in the two scenarios.

Responder's next bid needs to be defined as forcing or non-forcing, however.

The 2NT bid is, in fact, defined as non-forcing there. And despite your initial nonchalance, most people play that 2C promises more than "I wanted to bid 2C for whatever reason." In that case, we want to force to game (forcing to game was one of the correct answers of my puzzle before), so we would like to know that 2NT is forcing.

[helene_t]

 Zelandakh, on 2015-February-18, 18:30, said:

It seems to me that the only way for this system to work is for 2NT to be GF and 2♦ to essentially cover all of the non-GF hands. Even this is not going to be a bed of roses if, for example, partner now rebids 3♠. Quite frankly though, given the non-standard system I would have expected the OP to contain some agreements rather than have us all guess.

I agree that 2NT should be forcing but I am not sure if 2M should be. If I have a 12 count with a four card major, I would like to be able to encourage partner if he has a fit for my major but be able to stop in 3♦ otherwise. But maybe it gets to complicated and it is better to play as you suggests - that way it is probably easier to determine what is forcing and what isn't.

Is this really so non-standard? I may be crazy but playing with a random Dutch tournament player (younger than the Biedemeijer generation to whom 1M would be forcing) I would assume this system if undiscussed. If playing with a random Lancashire tournament player I would assume something like the GIB system.

Aquahombre: if 2NT is 11-13 it is nonforcing and if it is 13-17 it is forcing, and I would like to know which it is. This is very different from the uncontested auction in which opener is showing specifically 18-19.