[the hog]

billw55, on 2012-February-20, 07:45, said:

OK next question. What should 2♠ by responder (over 1♥) show?

Mini splinter for me.

[blackshoe]

CSGibson, on 2012-February-20, 10:26, said:

I and my regular partner are two of the three. I wonder who the third is?

awm, on 2012-February-20, 10:55, said:

Elianna and me.... oops, that's four.

And me. And George Rosenkranz.

[blackshoe]

aguahombre, on 2012-February-20, 12:51, said:

You certainly might play it that way, but I wouldn't call it Walsh. Walsh responds 1S with 4 spades, a longer diamond suit, and less than G.F.

Same principle. The strength is just a nit.

[P_Marlowe]

Siegmund, on 2012-February-20, 09:56, said:

The writers of the yellow card pamphlet, and about three other people in the world, use 2S over 1C-1D-1H as FSF. I've yet to meet any of them at the table.
It is true that 1S is more likely to include a spade suit than most other FSF bids. Opener will be correspondingly more willing to bid 2S rather than notrump with 4-4-1-4 hands.

This is part of Forum D+, the official German Standard System, and most likely
part of the French System as well, Forum D+ is basically a copy of the French
Standard System.
In a 5 card major system, when a 1C opening could be based on only 2 cards, it
makes sense to play 1S as natural, but FSF is still needed.

Playing Acol, 1S was FSF.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Zelandakh]

Siegmund, on 2012-February-20, 09:56, said:

The writers of the yellow card pamphlet, and about three other people in the world, use 2S over 1C-1D-1H as FSF. I've yet to meet any of them at the table.

Plus the vast majority of B/Is in England. To quote from the official EBU Acol System File...

Quote

2.6.1 Bidding the fourth suit

When the partnership has bid three suits a bid of the fourth suit is forcing and
artificial, asking partner for more information. The only exception is the auction
1♣ - 1♦ - 1♥ - 1♠ which shows four spades (still forcing). In this instance 2♠
would be the artificial ‘fourth suit forcing’ (FSF).

[jillybean]

Siegmund, on 2012-February-20, 09:56, said:

The writers of the yellow card pamphlet, and about three other people in the world, use 2S over 1C-1D-1H as FSF. I've yet to meet any of them at the table.

CSGibson, on 2012-February-20, 10:26, said:

I and my regular partner are two of the three. I wonder who the third is?

awm, on 2012-February-20, 10:55, said:

Elianna and me.... oops, that's four.

Codo, on 2012-February-20, 11:39, said:

And my partner- I do not count, he forced me to use it...

My partner & I played 2♠ 4sf so someone here is not telling the truth.

[ahydra]

1S nat F1, 2S 4th suit forcing is std in Acol. To me, whether 3D is GF or not depends on what 1NT is. Indeed it seems people have different opinions on whether 1x-something-something-something-1NT/2NT should be the same as 1x-something-1NT/2NT, and I'd like to know what is considered "standard" here.

So if 1NT here is 12-14 then I'd say 3D is invitiational. If it's 12-17 or 15-17 then 3D is GF. Either way, responder should have 6 diamonds.

ahydra

[han]

The original question is interesting and it is a shame that the discussion has turned into a completely uninteresting discussion about whether 1S is game forcing or not. Of course if 1S was game forcing then there would be no question about the nature of 3D.

So let's step back and consider the situation where 1C - 1D - 1H - 1S is forcing and shows spades, but does not show extra values. Then after 1C - 1D - 1H - 1S - 1NT, which bids should be forcing and which should not?

Let's first consider the 2-level bids, which are absolutely needed naturally? It seems to me that you really need 2D for weak 4-6 hands, as well as 2NT for invites. 2C for weak 4153 or 4504 hands seems important as well. 2H and 2S are not needed for weak hands, with a weak 4-3-5-1 hand we can pass 1NT and with a weak 5-6 we can bid 2D. However, both of these bids are useful as natural invitational (for example with K10xxx x AQJxxx x I'd like to bid a NF 2S and with Q10xx KJx Axxxx x I'd like to bid a NF 2H). However, I think that it is important to use one of these two bids as an artificial GF, and I think 2S is best used for this purpose. My preference would probably be:

2C = natural NF.
2D = to play.
2H = natural invitational.
2S = artificial GF.
2NT = natural invitation.
3C = natural invitation.
3D = natural invitation.
3H = natural, GF.
3S = natural GF.

Playing this scheme you don't have a way to bid an invitational 5-6 hand. You could play a jump to 3S as invitational and go through 2S if you need to force.

[billw55]

han, on 2012-February-21, 09:23, said:

Of course if 1S was game forcing then there would be no question about the nature of 3D.

billw55, on 2012-February-17, 15:49, said:

Interesting. If 1♠ is GF, then what does 3♦ show as opposed to 2♦?

Leave it to me to find questions where there aren't any. lol

[han]

In that case it depends on what a direct 2D or 1D followed by 3D shows. If either of those is natural and strong then perhaps 1S followed by 3D should show 4 spades and 6+ very good diamonds, as a single suiter can be shown differently. If no other way to show a single suited slam try with diamonds is available then obviously that's what it shows.

[billw55]

han, on 2012-February-22, 10:46, said:

In that case it depends on what a direct 2D or 1D followed by 3D shows. If either of those is natural and strong then perhaps 1S followed by 3D should show 4 spades and 6+ very good diamonds, as a single suiter can be shown differently. If no other way to show a single suited slam try with diamonds is available then obviously that's what it shows.

Thanks for the interesting ideas, including preceding post, (and everyone else too). Obviously there is a lot more to this auction than first meets the eye.