[Balrog49]

I've posed this question to the ACBL but would like to know what people here think, particularly Suction players.

In Suction, a bid in a suit at any level over a strong one club shows EITHER the next suit OR a 2-suiter in the next two higher suits. The overcaller NEVER has the suit he is bidding. Partner's (advancer's) first duty is to assume the Suction bidder has the one suiter and bid that suit, even with a void.

Obviously, advancer must alert the Suction bid and explain what it means in terms of distribution. But must he also explain that the bid is forcing if responder passes? Or is it responder's responsibility to ask whether or not it's forcing?

[mgoetze]

Huh? Why is it forcing? I mean, it should be pretty obvious that advancer won't want to pass all too often but I don't see why advancer shouldn't be allowed to pass with a suitable hand.

[hrothgar]

Balrog49, on 2013-September-21, 17:05, said:

Partner's (advancer's) first duty is to assume the Suction bidder has the one suiter and bid that suit, even with a void.

Wrong

Partner's first duty is to chose the bid that he thinks will cause the most trouble for the opponents.

Let's assume that the auction starts


(1♣) - 2♦ - (X) - ???

Where 2♦ shows Hearts or the Black suits

You hold

♠ J732
♥ K963
♦ T
♣ K642

In this case, you'd probably want to bid 3♠

If partner holds the back suits, you're happy to play at the three level given your double fit
If partner holds Hearts, you should be safe at the four level

I'd consider bidding hearts to be pretty wimpy...

[Balrog49]

mgoetze, on 2013-September-21, 17:16, said:

Huh? Why is it forcing? I mean, it should be pretty obvious that advancer won't want to pass all too often but I don't see why advancer shouldn't be allowed to pass with a suitable hand.

A valid point but the semantics are a bit slippery.

"Partner's (advancer's) first duty is to assume the Suction bidder has the one suiter and bid that suit, even with a void."

What exactly does "first duty" mean? Is advancer is required by system to bid something? If so, passing is anti-systemic and a breach of discipline. In that case, the bid must be considered forcing.

It seems to me, however, that passing might be a good tactical move, creating even more confusion, if advancer is willing to give up all the -50s or -100s the opponents can take.

[Balrog49]

hrothgar, on 2013-September-21, 17:27, said:

Wrong

Partner's first duty is to chose the bid that he thinks will cause the most trouble for the opponents.

That makes perfect sense to me but people play conventions differently. Some may consider a Suction bid to be forcing while others don't. It certainly makes a difference to responder.

It's similar to a double of an opening 1NT that shows a single-suited hand. Is advancer required to bid 2C or can he pass for penalties? My partner and I play runouts when the double can be passed, but system on otherwise. This has come up so many times that we always ask overcaller (doubler) to leave the table before asking advancer. Whatever the answer, it would otherwise create UI for the doubler and some players would use it.

[dake50]

♠ J732
♥ K963
♦ T
♣ K642

In this case, you'd probably want to bid 3♠

If partner holds the back suits, you're happy to play at the three level given your double fit
If partner holds Hearts, you should be safe at the four level

I'd consider bidding hearts to be pretty wimpy...
*** Is this a Paradox raise per Chris Ryall??

[straube]

Is a takeout double forcing? No. It's the same thing and the opponents ought not even be asking whether these Suction or 1-suit over NT bids are forcing or they risk giving unauthorized information.

[Vampyr]

Balrog49, on 2013-September-21, 17:59, said:

It's similar to a double of an opening 1NT that shows a single-suited hand. Is advancer required to bid 2C or can he pass for penalties? My partner and I play runouts when the double can be passed, but system on otherwise. This has come up so many times that we always ask overcaller (doubler) to leave the table before asking advancer. Whatever the answer, it would otherwise create UI for the doubler and some players would use it.

It is not up to the players to take an opponent away from the table. Even if it were, your procedure is improper. Ask for a ruling after you feel that UI has been "used" and you have been damaged.

I am sure that the director would give short shrift to your request that a player leave the table before you ask about the partnership's methods, and I am surprised that you have not been forbidden to continue performing your little trick.

[Balrog49]

straube, on 2013-September-21, 18:24, said:

Is a takeout double forcing? No. It's the same thing and the opponents ought not even be asking whether these Suction or 1-suit over NT bids are forcing or they risk giving unauthorized information.

It's not at all the same thing. If you sit down against a pair playing DONT, there's a distinct possibility that they treat the double as 100% forcing. In my experience, about half the people in a club game play that way. They love the idea of interfering with 1NT but they don't bother with the details (no pun intended). Obviously, in a strong field, the percentage is much lower, but I certainly would not assume anything in a stratified regional event.

If the double is forcing, you can pass and find out the doubler's suit with all sorts of hands without the risk of playing in 1NT doubled. Asking the doubler to leave the table eliminates the UI. Now and then, it may create resentment on the part of players who don’t understand the rules of the game and a director call may be necessary. Too bad.

[Vampyr]

Balrog49, on 2013-September-21, 19:28, said:

If the double is forcing, you can pass and find out the doubler's suit with all sorts of hands without the risk of playing in 1NT doubled. Asking the doubler to leave the table eliminates the UI. Now and then, it may create resentment on the part of players who don’t understand the rules of the game and a director call may be necessary. Too bad.

Too bad for whom? The director will not allow this request.

[Balrog49]

Vampyr, on 2013-September-21, 19:32, said:

Too bad for whom? The director will not allow this request.

There's an interesting discussion of the topic here.

http://iblf.matthew....?showtopic=3664

When it's come up in sectional events, the director has had no problem with my asking an opponent to leave the table. I've been asked by opponents to leave the table many times in similar situations and never thought twice about it. I've also voluntarily left the table when I knew that UI was forthcoming in order to eliminate any doubt.

[straube]

I think you're really asking about the next fellows call before you have to bid. Maybe you'll feel cheated if the opponents say their bid is forcing and then advancer passes anyway.

DONT auction
1N dbl* P ? Axx AKx KQx Qxxx

Michaels auction
1H (2H) P ? x QJT98xxx xx xx

Strong Club Suction auction
1C* (2H*) P ? x QJT9xxx xx xxx

Don't you think a lot of folks will pass these bids whether or not they think partner's bid is forcing or not?

[Vampyr]

Balrog49, on 2013-September-21, 19:46, said:

There's an interesting discussion of the topic here.

http://iblf.matthew....?showtopic=3664

When it's come up in sectional events, the director has had no problem with my asking an opponent to leave the table. I've been asked by opponents to leave the table many times in similar situations and never thought twice about it. I've also voluntarily left the table when I knew that UI was forthcoming in order to eliminate any doubt.

The discussion in that thread was about a player not knowing the meaning of partner's call. If that is what you are talking about, that is fine, except of course that only the director can request that a player leave the table.

[dake50]

Suction advancer (partner to Suction bid) only need state the intent of Suction.
He may pass to pile up 50+50+50+... or even 100+100+100+... intending to lose less.
He cooperates if he cooperates - bidding the assumed suit 'unless he don't' to blow some smoke.

[mycroft]

I look forward to playing with you when I have a balanced 15 and hear 1NT-X-"go away. Is that forcing"?

Yes, it's forcing. And I'm going to pass. And I'm sure if the TD takes *me* away from the table and asks my partner whether her bid was forcing, she'd say "yes". Then why did he pass? "Because he thinks he can set this in his hand."

"An agreement with partner is not an undertaking to opponents" - Edgar Kaplan. Enjoy.

[Free]

Advancer has no real obligations. His task is to land in the spot that will gain most for his side. He has all sorts of strategies available: he can pass with or without that suit, he can bid in function of overcaller's suit(s), or he can bid his own suit twice.

So after 1♣-2♦ he can:
- pass with or without ♦. There are various reasons to pass when not holding ♦, but making opps' life miserable is the most important one (if opener doubles and overcaller passes, what is responder to do?)
- bid ♥ or a black suit planning on playing in overcaller's suit. Overcaller will pass or correct, after which advancer will pass or raise overcaller's suit. This is the most common action, because usually you have some kind of fit for the singlesuiter and definitely a fit for one of the other 2 suits.
- bid ♥ or a black suit planning on rebidding that suit (or raise ♦). If you have 8♠s you can't just jump to 4♠ because overcaller will correct, but the chance is quite small partner has ♠ so just bid them at some level and rebid them the next round.

Note: there's another option: with support for the singlesuiter and a fit for one of the 2 other suits, you can bid the suit you don't support (in the example, when holding a 1=4=4=4 you could bid 2♠). The aim is
- to mess with opps (because they can't Dbl for takeout)
- you hope that overcaller has the singlesuiter and you steal their suit
- you hope that overcaller has the singlesuiter, they end up playing that suit anyway, but misplay the trumps
This is very risky though, because you plan on going down undoubled while you may have a playable spot available.

[Balrog49]

Vampyr, on 2013-September-21, 20:34, said:

The discussion in that thread was about a player not knowing the meaning of partner's call. If that is what you are talking about, that is fine, except of course that only the director can request that a player leave the table.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. I'm tired of being fixed by opponents who agree to play some convention but have no real understanding of it. It's like tossing a hand grenade up in the air with no idea of who it will land on. It creates unpleasant UI situations and randomizes the result.

There's nothing to be done about Suction over a strong club. Advancer clearly has no obligation to do anything other than make the best tactical call. I think it should be illegal in ACBL General Chart events for the same reason that it's illegal over an opening 1NT - in spite of the fact that the ACBL has always had a policy of "anything goes" over 1NT. But it's not illegal, so partner and I have decided to play it.

The DONT double of 1NT, however, is another story. Partner and I have agreed to counter it with two different methods. Which one applies depends on whether or not the advancer in any particular set of opponents believes he or she has the option to convert the double to penalty. Some of them think it's 100% forcing, no matter what's in their hand. Yes, of course anyone can decide to pass a forcing bid, but the probability of that is low enough to eliminate the need for a complex set of runouts, in which case we play our normal lebehsohl-based methods in order to punish the opponents when responder has most of the outstanding values. We don't want the doubler to know whether his partner bid two clubs out of necessity or blind obedience. In other words, we have an agreement that reduces the probability of getting randomized by these one-suited doubles, which seem to be coming up more and more often.

As to who has the right to ask an opponent to leave the table for a moment, I don't know who has the authority to say whether or not it's allowable. I live in ACBL land, where, as I mentioned before, it seems to be quite normal. I suspect that it depends on the governing body or the head director. Because the ACBL has no official stance on the topic (they haven't responded to my inquiry) and because it's been allowed by the head director whenever I've made the request, I'm going to proceed on the assumption that it's okay here but not in England. Typical American lack of manners, right?

[Mbodell]

Balrog49, on 2013-September-23, 10:49, said:

As to who has the right to ask an opponent to leave the table for a moment, I don't know who has the authority to say whether or not it's allowable. I live in ACBL land, where, as I mentioned before, it seems to be quite normal. I suspect that it depends on the governing body or the head director. Because the ACBL has no official stance on the topic (they haven't responded to my inquiry) and because it's been allowed by the head director whenever I've made the request, I'm going to proceed on the assumption that it's okay here but not in England. Typical American lack of manners, right?

It is not ok in the ACBL to ask an opponent to leave the table. You ought to be calling a director who can decide what is appropriate (ask question with both opponents at the table, ask question with only one opponent at the table, not ask question at all, etc.). You also seem to be wanting to ask how the advancer will take the bid instead of what the partnership agreement is. If you call the director it is possible that the X will be the one who knows the partnership agreement and the advancer will be asked to leave the table and the doubler will be the one to tell you the agreement. You are only entitled to the agreement, and the opponents don't need to have an agreement about how forcing a call is. The X shows a single suiter and a 2C advance shows a desire for the doubler to reveal that suit. That is a perfectly fine agreement without going in to the details of when it is forcing or not. I've never had a discussion with partners of if it is forcing or not (although I don't play DONT that often), but I have passed it exactly once. It was obvious to me with something like QJTx KJx Qx AJxx that the 1nt bidder was in trouble.

[Vampyr]

Balrog49, on 2013-September-23, 10:49, said:

We don't want the doubler to know whether his partner bid two clubs out of necessity or blind obedience.

Hang on, it's the bidder you ask to leave the table? Sounds like asking the player to leave the table rather than calling the director is a pretty good strategy for you, because it would require extraordinary circumstances for the director to allow that. The bidder's partner is expected to tell you the agreement during the auction, and if the explanation is a mistake the bidder is supposed to tell you at the appropriate time.

If advancer doesn't know the agreement, it is not unusual for the director to ask advancer to leave the table while the bidder explains the agreement. I cannot imagine a case in which the director deems it would be appropriate to send the bidder away and while advancer explains the agreement.

[straube]

Personally I think you may be barking up the wrong tree. Your concern (if any) should be knowing the likelihood of advancer passing a DONT double and then having agreements in place based on this likelihood.

Perhaps you should ask advancer (after 1N dbl) "Do you have any agreement in place as to strength or hcps for the double?"

They will probably answer you "no".

On the rare occasion that they say "It promises 8 hcps" or whatever...you can base the meaning of your redouble etc on that answer. Like if it promises 10 or more you react as if it's a penalty double and use runouts. If less than 10, your bids take on a different meaning. Or adjust to taste.

This seems a really small thing to worry about.