[daveharty]

---

Worth another bid after partner's negative free bid? If so, what?

[Fluffy]

this will be a useful dummy hopefully, I pass.

[whereagles]

3♠. If I have to guess, I might as well guess to hog the hand

This hand is a good reason why NFB are not ideal at the 3 level. Unless you have a narrow range for it, you're gonna be guessing a lot.

[FM75]

Would partner make a negative free 3 ♦ bid with something like:

♠ AT ♥ xx ♦ KQJ976 ♣ xxx or
♠ QT ♥ xx ♦ KJT987 ♣ Axx?

Partner can pass and wait for a 2 ♠ rebid, but chose not to. He could use negative X to show a minor at the top end of the range. I would expect really good diamonds and a side ace or king based on your holding. With hearts over opponents, partner is likely to have diamonds over opponents. The hand looks like it may very will be double/double eight card fit - so an 18-19 total trick hand.

Try 4♦. If partner rebids 4♠, you are probably in good shape. With your support and a trick in a black suit, he might take a push to an easy diamond game and by not delaying diamond support you may head off trump lead. A heart lead is likely and does not hurt. A diamond lead is probably worst but unlikely unless you delay support.

Perhaps I am painting partner too optimistically based on selection of this hand for posting

[aguahombre]

Neither of the hands FM gave is a negative freebid. A NFB is not forcing for one round, and those hands should want to force for one round.

[FM75]

aguahombre, on 2012-January-08, 16:00, said:

Neither of the hands FM gave is a negative freebid. A NFB is not forcing for one round, and those hands should want to force for one round.

OK - I am not familiar with NFB. So how much less can responder have to make a free bid, as opposed to forcing bid, OR less and still make an NFB and not an alternative bid?

Replace the A with Q? Is that enough in either example?

[mike777]

FM75, on 2012-January-09, 23:53, said:

OK - I am not familiar with NFB. So how much less can responder have to make a free bid, as opposed to forcing bid, OR less and still make an NFB and not an alternative bid?

Replace the A with Q? Is that enough in either example?

fwiw with a gf hand pard makes x often


fwiw I play neg freebid more than 5-10 much more.....but less than gf.

of course you will always, always, in bidding challenge have the borderline hand.

[aguahombre]

Negative free bids merely show length in the suit bid and the desire to play exactly at the 2-level where they have bid.

Standard freebids are of invitational strength or more and forcing for one round opposite an opening bid. (None of what I said as anything to do with advances to partner's overcalls).

Others, a small few of us, consider freebids at the two-level to be game forcing.

Whatever the partnership uses, the negative double serves to handle the other. Standard players with a hand which looks like a negative freebid (too weak to bid freely) will pass or negative double. NFB players use the negative double with hands too strong for a drop-dead bid.

It is not a "negative freebid" if the values shown are invitational +. NFB is a weak competitive non-forcing bid, and alertable in ACBL.

[akwoo]

My definition of a negative free bid at this vulnerability and level is a very good 8 (Kx, x, AJTxxx, xxxx) to a bad 12 (Jx, Qxx, KQxxx, KJx). It includes invitational hands but not game forcing ones.

3♠ shows a minimum with 0-1 diamonds, so it doesn't work. I suppose it would be better to tinker with the responses to 3♥ so that you can stop in 3♠ when partner has a non-fitting minimum with no heart stopper, but I haven't and probably you haven't. That means I'm torn between 4 imperfect bids: 3♥, 4♠, 3no, and 4♦. I probably bid 3 no trump, gambling on partner having a club stopper, but it's better if I bid it quickly because in that case opponents might not catch that I have a club problem.

[aguahombre]

For those (above) with their own definitions of negative freebids, here is one link.

If your partners agree with your definition which is not a negative freebid, that is fine. But I recommend you don't call it a negative freebid, either with a new partner or when misdislcosing the meaning of your bid to the opponents at the table.

[mike777]

aguahombre, on 2012-January-13, 20:16, said:

For those (above) with their own definitions of negative freebids, here is one link.

If your partners agree with your definition which is not a negative freebid, that is fine. But I recommend you don't call it a negative freebid, either with a new partner or when misdislcosing the meaning of your bid to the opponents at the table.

Since I play Bergen style I went and dug up my copy of the book.
Granted my copy is over 25 years old so there may be some updates in theory over the years.


The link is at least a bit misleading on how Bergen plays NFB.

But less than GF, NF, but not silly is a good start. You need to do something with inv hands since x and bid is gf.

Big clubbers may play NFB a bit lighter than Bergen 2/1 players as stated in his book.

I see I play it a bit better than 5-7 on the low side often as the range just becomes way too wide and unplayable I think.

[aguahombre]

The people who might have 11 or 12 are the ones to whom I am trying to explain the concept. A standard freebid is one round forcing, but not insisting on game. Our freebids are stronger than that, but not standard. Negative freebids are not forcing at all and don't contain 11's and 12's.

[mike777]

aguahombre, on 2012-January-13, 21:05, said:

The people who might have 11 or 12 are the ones to whom I am trying to explain the concept. A standard freebid is one round forcing, but not insisting on game. Our freebids are stronger than that, but not standard. Negative freebids are not forcing at all and don't contain 11's and 12's.

well that is the question with NFB, how do you handle those hands since x and rebid is gf.


11-12 very often aint enough to gf for me so....

Since I open pretty light I tend to throw those hands into NFB often and raise the minimum to around 8 or so.

so roughly 8-12 or so rather than 5-10.

in any case as I stated in a bidding quiz you will be given those gray area hands that are just tough.

[gnasher]

aguahombre, on 2012-January-13, 20:16, said:

For those (above) with their own definitions of negative freebids, here is one link.

If your partners agree with your definition which is not a negative freebid, that is fine. But I recommend you don't call it a negative freebid, either with a new partner or when misdislcosing the meaning of your bid to the opponents at the table.

Why does that link have greater authority than the opinions expressed by posters here?

Or, for that matter, the opinions of the Bridge World ("a nonforcing suit bid by responder over an intervening overcall") and the WBF ("A non-forcing, non-jump, new suit bid at the two- or three-level after an opponent's interference with partner's opening suit bid.", in the guide to completing the convention card).

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2012-January-14, 04:18

[aguahombre]

I don't understand your point, Gnasher. we are talking in this thread about free 2-bids in a new suit. The link says "NFB" are non-forcing, non invitational. If you use them that way, they are an alertable treatment in my jurisdiction. If you use freebids in a standard or stronger way, they are not. 11 or 12 points opposite an opening bid is invitational, not a weak competitive call.

To repeat: you and other posters may agree on any maximum you want for the freebid, but to describe it as a NFB is misinformation.

[gnasher]

As I understand it, you believe that the term "Negative Free Bid" means that it is both (a) non-forcing and (b) less than invitational. You have linked to a source which supports this view.

Others believe that the term "Negative Free Bid" means that it is (a) non-forcing and (b) less than game-forcing, but not any more specific about strength. That is, it is possble to play the bid as spanning a range from competiive to invitational, and still call it a "Negative Free Bid". I have quoted two sources that support this view.

Perhaps I've misunderstood, but you seem to be saying that your understanding of the term is the only correct one. Is that what you're saying?

[daveharty]

Not to get in the way of a good argument, but I did want to point out that whatever one's personal interpretation of the term "Negative Free Bid", the original post gives our partnership agreement: 5-10 with good diamonds. When you see partner's hand, you might disagree with his bid, but I think he was making the best of an uncomfortable situation given our agreements. Also, given the vulnerability, I would expect him to be on the high side of the range more often than not. If you think he is too strong for a NFB, then exchange the club queen for a low one, and it wouldn't change much. The full hand:

---

[whereagles]

How can one play NFBs of 5-10 at the 3 level? That puts opener permanently on a guess. At such a level a 2-point range is probably the most you can cope with.

[daveharty]

whereagles, on 2012-January-14, 15:00, said:

How can one play NFBs of 5-10 at the 3 level? That puts opener permanently on a guess. At such a level a 2-point range is probably the most you can cope with.

daveharty, on 2012-January-14, 12:01, said:

Also, given the vulnerability and the level, I would expect him to be on the high side of the range more often than not.

Fixed my own post.