[bowbells]

Heres a quick one

Bidding goes:

1S - P - 2C - 2H - P - 3S

What strength would u expect from the responder bidding 3S ??

Thanks in advance

[twcho]

wlc to BBO forum, bowbells

I guess you have missed one pass from the opps. The bidding probably shd be like this:
1S - P - 2C - P - 2H - P - 3S

Suppose you are playing sayc. Then pd's 2S will not be forcing. So I think this 3S shd show 3 card support and game going hand.

[the hog]

Depends on system. In Acol this is invitational only.
In 2/1 this shows 3-4 S, a good C suit and is inv to start cue bidding.

[jtfanclub]

In SAYC, I'd also take it as strongly invitational. 2♠ is simple suit preference: it might be 2 spades and 9 points. 3♠ is much stronger...it asks you to bid 4♠ or 3NT unless you have a good reason not to (like you're now regretting having opened, or you have three small diamonds). It's basically a limit raise with 3 card support.

If you're playing fourth suit forcing, then it's easy: 3♦ is forcing, 3♠ isn't.

[1eyedjack]

I think that in SAYC this sequence is game forcing. If you were only invitational you would rebid 2S rather than 3S. If you were less than invitational you would not bid 2C in the first place.

I think that this principle would also apply to most "modern" Acol bidders, at least in UK.

It is very useful to be able to establish a game forcing sequence that confirms a fit below game level. It particularly helps slam investigation.

The classical problem in Acol-type systems is that the 1S opener may initially be a 4 card suit. If you have 10-11 points with 3 card support you cannot give an immediate limit raise to 3 on what may at that time be only a 7 card fit, and a 1N response is non-forcing, so you temporise with a 2/1 change of suit. When opener rebids a new suit it confirms that his 1S was originally based on 5 (with only 4 he would either have a balanced hand and would have rebid NT, or would have opened a different suit).

The "modern" way of treating this is that giving a direct raise to the 2 level on a 3 card suit (with the required range of values) is acceptable. With that strength and less than 3 card support you would respond 1NT. So giving preference to 2S after a 2/1 change of suit tends to have full-blooded invitational values.

You will find players who adopt a different style. It is just one of those things that you have to agree on.

[EricK]

jtfanclub, on Aug 8 2004, 01:29 AM, said:

In SAYC, I'd also take it as strongly invitational.  2♠ is simple suit preference: it might be 2 spades and 9 points.  3♠ is much stronger...it asks you to bid 4♠ or 3NT unless you have a good reason not to (like you're now regretting having opened, or you have three small diamonds).  It's basically a limit raise with 3 card support. 

If you're playing fourth suit forcing, then it's easy:  3♦ is forcing, 3♠ isn't.

In Standard American (and most other non-2/1 GF systems), this sequence shows a limit raise in ♠ with exactly 3♠.

However, SAYC plays this as GF (this exact sequence is mentioned in the ACBL's booklet). With a limit raise you raise directly to 3♠ with 3 or more ♠. This may not be the optimum approach, but SAYC is a rigidly defined system, and that's what it says.

Now the question arises, if you are playing SAYC with a pick-up partner on BBO, will he play the actual SAYC methods or will he be treating SAYC as a synonym for "Fairly natural, Strong NT, 5 card majors"?

Unfortunately the answer is probably the latter.

My advice is to definitely bid game if you have any excuse at all, but if you pass, pray that you don't make 10 tricks

Eric

[Trpltrbl]

Depends on system.

Mike

[whereagles]

In French standard (2/1 not game-forcing),

1S 2C
2H 3S

is a forcing raise. Why? Because...

2S would be invitational. IT IS NOT A PREFERENCE.. he who could bid 2C can also bid 2NT after 2H.
4S would show a 12-14 or so hand, with spades plus side club suit.
3S is open for a forcing raise thus.

Note that

1S 2C
2H 3D (4th suit forcing)
3H 3S

is also a forcing raise, but because of the 4SF, it usually means trump support quality is not as good as a direct 3S over 2H.

[kgr]

1S-2D
2H-3S
With your jump in Spades you show real Spade support (this is not simply preference).
With a limit hand you could have shown this immediatly (3S, 2NT, .. depending on method).
Therfore 3S is GF here, and stronger then 4S (principle of fast arrival).
I play this sequence with my regular partner as:
- slem try with Spade support and A good 5 card Diamond