[bluecalm]

Quote

Hands like this show why I think forcing NT sucks

You must admit though you can end up in silly spot playing non forcing 1NT even easier. For example you could be going down 3 vulnerable with your 9 or 10 card heart fit chilling on the side... at least if you play forcing NT and responder has 6+card suit you will play there usually (especially if you bid 2♣ on all 5-3-3-2's).

I did some simuls and I am still no sure about correct rebid. I am too lazy now to make it on bigger sample with better assumptions (excluding 15-17 5-3-3-2 etc). I think it's very close anyway.

[the hog]

Having played both forcing and nf 1NT responses, I do believe that in 2/1 a fnt is far superior. It allows you to slot in 3 card support with invit hands, and it often does give you a better chance of finding a better contract.

[bluecalm]

It's quite amazing I agree with Hog 2nd time today...
Strange things happening...

[MickyB]

On this hand, I would definitely pass 2♣. Besides anything else, bidding on this hand puts more pressure on the 2♥ rebid, now partner will find it difficult to know when to pull 2♥ and when to raise with interest in game.

I much prefer to play a semi-forcing NT. If I have a flat 12-count and bid again, partner's most likely actions are to give preference back to a 5-2 fit, raise my minor and rebid 2NT on his flat 11. None of these make me particularly happy. Of course, a lot of this depends on your other responses to 1M - I quite like to bid 2m then 3m as natural and invitational, and to have 1M:3D as a three-card limit raise, which ties in well.

[JLOGIC]

bluecalm, on Aug 28 2010, 08:50 PM, said:

It's quite amazing I agree with Hog 2nd time today...
Strange things happening...

You know your heroes Meckwell don't play forcing NT!

BTW I don't understand the above 2 3 card limit raise comments. I don't play forcing NT and give my 3 card limit raises in 1N. I'm usually happier to play 1N than I am 3M. I guess it's different at MP, but for 3M to be right over 1N in imps, 3M must play 3 tricks better! And that's when I'm balanced! I find it much mroe common that 3M is down and 1N makes on a 3 card LR hand type where I would have passed.

As far as missign our 6-3 or 7-3 fit and playing 1N, well, that is unlikely because the opponents would probably have bid. When it goes 1M p 1N p p p and I have a 6 or 7 card suit, my hand is probably not that good. That means they have more than half the deck and they have some fit somewhere (maybe 2 fits or a big fit), they would have bid. If they forgot to bid, they probably would have bid over our 6-3 fit.

And even if worst comes to worst and we play 1N instead of our 6-3 fit with half the deck or so, it might make! It's 1 freaking NT!

Much more common is that when we were going to be allowed to play 1N, both of our hands are balanced and we have NO fit. In those cases 1N is much better than 2 of something in a non fit, and those cases are so much more frequent.

Another much more common thing is that responder has no idea what to do when his partner could have a 3 card minor and a balanced minimum. I mean some hands are just impossible to bid, and often you get to the wrong/stupid partial because of this. Even playing bart does not solve this.

The other frequent thing is even though I'm minimum, partner was going to invite game. Maybe if I bid a 3 card minor he was going to raise it! I don't like playing 2N when I have a balanced minimum and I often go down when 1N would have made!

[bluecalm]

Quote

You know your heroes Meckwell don't play forcing NT!

I know
They seemed to be switching back and forth for some time (or it was mistakes by vugraph explaining) but I am aware they settled for semi forcing.

I usually play MP's so missing good suit partscore is big. I don't think 2M on 5-2 which is often the final contract is on average worse than 1NT. Forcing 1NT also allows me to play solid 1M-2M. I agree that at imps it's less of an issue

I usually play that with 5-3-3-2 you always bid 2♣ so 2♦ can't be 3 (unless 4-5-3-1 exactly). That gives me chances for both 5+-2+ heart and 6+-2+ diamonds partscores.

One thing I've never understood about semi forcing 1NT is what do you do with maximum balanced say 14hcp.
If you pass you might miss 3NT on 25 (scary!) if you bid better minor then well responder loses most advantages you were talking about.
I guess you open 1NT with every 5M-3-3-2 15-17 so another problem doesn't happen to you but if you don't open those hands with 1NT it's very useful to be able to bid 2♣ with them and then go to 2NT instead of going to 2NT directly over 1NT (because you gain a chance to find hearts as well as you free 2NT rebid for other things).

By the way such 2♣ is another application of bidding principle that Martens was talking about. Balanced hand is separate hand type and you don't want to put it in to many bids.
It's better to have it in 2♣ instead of both 2♣ and 2♦.

Similarly it's better to bid 1M - 2♣ with al balanced hands than to bid 2♦ with say 3-4-4-2 and having balanced hand in both bids because you lose both space (trying to untangle 2 bids instead of one) and precision (because you have two murky bids instead of one murky bid and one useful precise bid).
Another example is opening better minor. It's better to open all balanced hands with 1♣ and to have it in both 1♣ and 1♦.
This seems to be completely unknown principle in NA from what I am reading on this forum

[JLOGIC]

Bidding 2C after 1M-1N with 5332 playing forcing NT is not unknown in NA I promise I used to play that when I played forcing NT, and many experts play it here. It seems clearly better to me, especially if you play bart. I still think passing is best

Opening 1C on all balanced hands is less common, but it is becoming more popular among top experts especially with transfer responses to 1C becoming more popular. I think it's clear that opening 1C on all balanced hands is better if for no other reason than that you have a better system over 1C. It might make competitive auctions harder though, a la precision 1D, but obviously your competitive auctions when you open 1D will be much better and all constructive auctions will be better. Outside of top players I agree that this concept is not well known, and even most top players do not play it still, I'm not sure why!

Bidding 2C over 1M with all balanced hands is pretty much competely expert standard now and many non experts know it as well.

Your point about 5332 with 14 is a good one, it is why Bob Hamman has always included many 14s into his NT range. The theory is just to open 1N with a 5 card major and 14 unless your hand is terrible, and if your hand is that terrible then you can miss 25 HCP games and feel ok about it.

*Side tangent but another problem with 14 is that it's basically a GF opposite a competitive 2/1, but you cant really cuebid or jump to 3N with it. I think having non bad 14s in your range cause a lot of problems in general.*

Most people who play semi forcing NT will bid over 1N with 13-14 balanced because they're willing to accept an invite.

I think this is not good since a 5332 14 cannot accept an invite really on an auction like 1S-1N-2D-3D (if you bid 2D with that like most people do). With 13 I'm happy to play 1N.

My style is really only playable if your NT range includes 14s with 5card majors, and you open 1N with stronger 5332s, and you play invitational jump shifts over 1M (as mickyb alluded to), so that you arent bidding 1N with like 6 hearts and 10, I think it's good but it's not standard at all... all in the name of playing 1N a lot and rebidding 4 card minors As you can tell I hate rebidding 2/3 card minors. Since everything fits well for me (I like to open 1N aggressively, I like to play inv jump shifts anyways because I hate bergen and stuff like it, I like to play 1N/not get too high on invitations getting passed/I like to open light), it works ok for me.

If I didn't play invitational jump shifts or opening 1N with 5332 14s, I would still rather play traditional semi forcing 1N (bid with 13-14 5332, pass with 11-12 5332). This is not that different from forcing NT, it just means you pass occasionally, and I feel like passing with 5332 11-12 will still be a winner.

Finally, you could just play like jdonn and play foricng NT but pass sometimes (as far as I can tell jdonn bids with a 5332 11 if he thinks its suit oriented, he only passes on scattered values and balanced and min or something). This just assumes you don't bid 1N with GF hands ever.

By the way, this forum should not be your guide to what experts in NA know/play. Most of the people who post here frequently are not very good and don't know that much and don't play that much in real life. Not criticizing/aimed at anyone obv, I just mean you shouldn't base your entire assumptions of NA on this forum!

[JLOGIC]

And I just don't agree about the 5-2 fit at the 2 level being better than 1N in general. It depends on your hand of course, but when the stronger hand has the 5 card suit I think it's much less good to play 2M than when the weaker hand has the 5 card suit, since the stronger hand should have entries.

I'd just rather play 1 trick lower. I feel like its way more common that the 5-2 and 1N make the same amount of tricks than that the 5-2 makes 2 more tricks. Not to mention, often times partner has a stiff spade, it's not like he's promised 2. Those hands cause a lot of problems. For instance if you rebid 2C with 5332, 1444 with responder is a huge problem hand type. You're going to play a 6 card fit and that seems silly to me. If you rebid 2D on 5332 then 1435 is a problem and you'll play a 6 card fit.

Even though bidding 2C is better, it's not like it solves all problems. Not to mention all the times partner invites, you will get somewhere worse than 1N, and that's not that uncommon to me.

But it all depends on your overall framework and likes and dislikes. FWIW Hamman used to tell me "as long as people play 5 card majors and forcing NT, I will keep winning." LOL. He lumped forcing NT with 5 card majors, he hated it that much..

His system now? 5 card majors and forcing NT. I think he has stayed at or near the top for so long because he can adapt. Amusingly I used to be a big forcing NT supporter and now I hate it, so who knows where I'll end up on the issue.

I do find the imp vs MP difference interesting though, I have been thinking about it solely from an imp perspective, it's possible forcing NT is better at MP and semi forcing is better at imps. I play probably 20x more imps than MP though.

[bluecalm]

Thanks for those posts. That was very interesting

Quote

I do find the imp vs MP difference interesting though, I have been thinking about it solely from an imp perspective, it's possible forcing NT is better at MP and semi forcing is better at imps. I play probably 20x more imps than MP though.

Maybe that's the difference between bridge pros and bridge donks.
Bridge donks like me play 99%+ matchpoints... (at least live)

[NickRW]

bluecalm, on Aug 29 2010, 06:32 AM, said:

Thanks for those posts. That was very interesting

Quote

I do find the imp vs MP difference interesting though, I have been thinking about it solely from an imp perspective, it's possible forcing NT is better at MP and semi forcing is better at imps. I play probably 20x more imps than MP though.

Maybe that's the difference between bridge pros and bridge donks.
Bridge donks like me play 99%+ matchpoints... (at least live)

Hmm. It seems Justin's thoughts about it are similar to what I've thought. Though, FWIW, it was the thought of not being able to play 1NT at MPs that put me off the idea of forcing NT. It is true that sometimes a suit will play better - or at least make - but it seems to me at least as frequent that 1NT scores better.

I guess I have to admit I'm playing in weak NT land - so most folks will have been opening 1NT in the first place with many of the openers being considered here - and will often play in it - so, if you're playing strong (or strongish NT) and rate your card play skills relative to the field, then the opportunity to get back on even terms is quite attractive at MPs.

Nick

[kenrexford]

J, I agree and use a style exactly like you have described. The one question that I do have, though, is whether you also play Bart in this scheme. I do, and I think its utility is still there, even if Opener passes 1NT freqently, because the intermediate JS into hearts (for my part, that is 3♦) is still so expensive and because the 5-3 heart fit potential is so important. Interested in your thoughts.

[mgoetze]

The_Hog, on Aug 29 2010, 02:41 AM, said:

Having played both forcing and nf 1NT responses, I do believe that in 2/1 a fnt is far superior. It allows you to slot in 3 card support with invit hands, and it often does give you a better chance of finding a better contract.

What's the big advantage, if you're still going to jump to 3M to show your invite?

I find the 3-card invitation fits much better into 2♣ (along with clubs GF and balanced GF). Plus, you get to stop in 2M when the invitation gets declined!

[the hog]

mgoetze, on Aug 30 2010, 08:19 AM, said:

The_Hog, on Aug 29 2010, 02:41 AM, said:

Having played both forcing and nf 1NT responses, I do believe that in 2/1 a fnt is far superior. It allows you to slot in 3 card support with invit hands, and it often does give you a better chance of finding a better contract.

What's the big advantage, if you're still going to jump to 3M to show your invite?

I find the 3-card invitation fits much better into 2♣ (along with clubs GF and balanced GF). Plus, you get to stop in 2M when the invitation gets declined!

So how do YOU bid say:
AQx
x
Kxxxx
Qxxx

over a 1S opening, assuming 2/1 is a gf?

[JLOGIC]

kenrexford, on Aug 29 2010, 05:54 PM, said:

J, I agree and use a style exactly like you have described. The one question that I do have, though, is whether you also play Bart in this scheme. I do, and I think its utility is still there, even if Opener passes 1NT freqently, because the intermediate JS into hearts (for my part, that is 3♦) is still so expensive and because the 5-3 heart fit potential is so important. Interested in your thoughts.

Yes I do, I think having 2 ways to raise to 3C and 2 ways to bid 2S and 2 degrees of 2H bids are all very important