[mikeh]

At the risk of straying from the OP, I am usually a big fan of transfers in competitive auctions, but this is one of the few instances where, after the opps bid and raise a major, I see a compelling case for a natural 2N. Partner will often deliver a source of tricks on this auction and we need some way of inviting the 9 trick game, especially at imps.

I may be biased, because my preference is, in any event, to play 2♠ F1. I know (I think) the main arguments both ways and would gladly swap to NF if I played mps...and feel it to be close at imps. However, the lack of transfers plus the utility of the fit jump combine to make me prefer the F1 treatment...which, obviously, would likely be the unanimous call on the posted hand were that agreement in play.

[Zelandakh]

gnasher, on 2010-October-29, 16:47, said:

I, on the other hand, have often seen this method played in Britain, and I think it's normal in the circles where I play for 2♠ to be non-forcing.


So far as I can see, Robson and Segal avoided discussing whether this particular category of sequence is forcing (possibly because it didn't show a fit, and was therefore considered unworthy of discussion).

You are correct. The relevant part is page 60 where they specifically avoid giving a meaning for a new suit at the 2 level. I think the point is that they expect the reader to select the style for new suits and this does not have a huge bearing on the point of the article which is to support early with a bid that shows your hand type and offensive/defensive nature. What they do talk about is using a double to cover the hand types that are not covered elsewhere, in this way they are presumably saying that if you play 2S as non-forcing then you should double with stronger hands (good 1-suited hand), whereas if you choose to play 2S as forcing then you double with the weak type (scramble). The examples they give tend to suggest they favout the latter approach but it is not explicitly stated anywhere as far as I can tell. Finally, for what it is worth the R-S method after 1H - 2C - 2H is essentially natural except for 2NT as a high-card raise to 3C or better, and all jumps showing fit. It is different for a non-club 2 level overcall, then 3 of a lower-ranking suit shows support (fit non-jump).

[gnasher]

Zelandakh, on 2010-October-30, 04:02, said:

The relevant part is page 60

Or page 97 if you happen to be looking at the printed version.

[gwnn]

Page 212 of the pdf:

probably the most important bridge book on competitive bidding every written said:

When the take-out double is opposite an overcall
This is the most awkward situation. It is all too easy to see why. First, your direct new suit bid (if natural) is
never forcing. Thus in auctions like
(1)
1♦-1♥-2♦-2♠
(2)
1♣-1♥-1♠-2♦
the last bid is natural, constructive, but not forcing.

Later they go on about the question, what to do with a one suited hand opposite an overcall; the solution tends to be to double or jump to game if your suit can handle it.