"Semi-forcing" is a bit of an oxy-moron, isn't it? Either a bid is forcing or it's not. Whatever -- we play semi-forcing notrumps over an opening bid of 1 of a major.
Most 2 over 1 players play forcing notrumps, at least as a non-passed hand. We did that for a while, too, but I got sick of squirming over what to do with my 4522 12-count over pard's forcing bid. And why should I have to bid? Pard's already denied 4 spades and game forcing values, I'm not accepting a 3-card limit raise anyway, and if we have a 6-2 minor suit fit, we're probably doing just as well in 1N. This is a hand that wants to pass.
McKenzie already plays semi-forcing notrumps with several partners, so he was happy to change our card when I asked about it. Our agreement is pretty simple. If you have a game forcing hand, find a 2 over 1 bid, even if it is a 3-card minor (for example, pard opens 1S and you're 3-4-3-3 with a 15 count -- I like 2C here better than 2H or 2N -- it's less of a lie and I can show the spade fit on the next round). If you have a hand that is not strong enough to force, you can bid a semi-forcing 1N.
Over the 1N, opener can pass any balanced minimum -- hands that wouldn't accept invitations to game and hands that have no extra shape. Now, when opener bids on over 1N, he is promising either a real suit or extra values. Because we're not shy about opening 1N with a 5-card major, a new suit over 1N tends to be real - 4 or 5 cards in length.
With this structure, responder has a much clearer picture of opener's hand, and you don't get pushed up when both of you have bad hands.
This is simple and convenient, and it's one of the few things I try to insist on when making a card with a new partner.
Friday, August 8, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comments:
Now that your 2c is commonly 3, your next step is to make 1M-2d promise 5 and to bid 1s-2c on a GFing 3442 =) at least thats what I like.
Post a Comment