[Wackojack]

With 1 partner we are considering playing forcing 1NT responses. Our opening bids are in general:

1M 10-15 if there is a singleton 11-13 if 5332
1NT 14-16 which includes 5M332 distributions
1♣ 17+ balanced no singleton no 6 card major or 16+ 6 card major or 5431
2M 9-15, 5+ in major and another suit.

I can see advantages in having a forcing 1NT response where responder has 3 card support in enabling more types of hand to be shown. However, there are many hands where responder has a singleton or doubleton in opener's major when 1NT is likely to be the only making contract. Here is one of a number of examples:
♠ KQJ76
♥ A98
♦ Q107
♣ 65

♠ 8
♥ K42
♦ K654
♣ QJ1087

1♠-1NT-p Very likely to make
1♠-1NT-2♦-p Less likely to make


Any views or relevant facts on why we should or should not play the forcing 1NT?

[steve2005]

Your openings look like they are light enough you shouldn't be playing 2/1.
If your not playing 2/1 there isn't much advantage playing forcing NT.

In a 2/1 context you could allow passing of 1N on balanced minimums. This possible for you as your balanced hands are 11-13.
You might want an artificial bid for a 3 card raise with a singleton you don't want to be in 1N. like 1S-3H or 1H-2S.

here is a bridge winner from some who has thought about this more.

http://bridgewinners...emi-forcing-nt/

[helene_t]

Have you considered playing 1NT forcing after 1♠ but nonforcing after 1♥? Assuming you don't play Flannery, it is nice to be able to pass the 1NT response after 1♥. And after 1♠-1NT, you could still have a hearts fit so forcing 1nt has more merit.

[Phil]

If you play lighter openings, 2/1 works perfectly fine. You just have to beef up your 2/1s.

[Wackojack]

steve2005, on 2018-March-01, 13:33, said:

Your openings look like they are light enough you shouldn't be playing 2/1.
If your not playing 2/1 there isn't much advantage playing forcing NT.

In a 2/1 context you could allow passing of 1N on balanced minimums. This possible for you as your balanced hands are 11-13.
You might want an artificial bid for a 3 card raise with a singleton you don't want to be in 1N. like 1S-3H or 1H-2S.

here is a bridge winner from some who has thought about this more.

http://bridgewinners...emi-forcing-nt/

Thanks for the link. There is a lot to absorb especially as there are major differences of opinions. I may report when (if) I come to some conclusion.

[Vampyr]

Phil, on 2018-March-01, 15:16, said:

If you play lighter openings, 2/1 works perfectly fine. You just have to beef up your 2/1s.

Yes but the forcing NT is the weak oart of the system, so you don’t want to overload it.

[helene_t]

Vampyr, on 2018-March-02, 19:40, said:

Yes but the forcing NT is the weak oart of the system, so you don’t want to overload it.

If you play 1M as 10-15, the forcing NT could be 8-14 or such, that is maybe overloaded but not more so than it would be in a standard system (with a more conservative style) where it is 5-11.

[sfi]

Vampyr, on 2018-March-02, 19:40, said:

Yes but the forcing NT is the weak oart of the system, so you don’t want to overload it.

IMO, this is the main reason why invitational jump shifts have become popular in 2/1. It allows you to open lighter by removing trouble hands from the 1NT response.