[gwnn]

helene_t, on 2012-July-10, 08:18, said:

I would be dissapointed if p passed me in 4m in a GF auction. OK, maybe if my hand was tightly limited. But then again he might pass me in 3M by the same token.

Why not use the words correctly? GF means GF and "forcing to 4m" means "forcing to 4m".

Because "forcing to 4m" would be a misnomer too maybe "forcing to 3NT"? I think best would be "forcing to game or 4 of a minor".

[MickyB]

Edit: Too slow

[mikl_plkcc]

gwnn, on 2012-July-10, 08:23, said:

Because "forcing to 4m" would be a misnomer too maybe "forcing to 3NT"? I think best would be "forcing to game or 4 of a minor".

I think the best term is "forcing to 3NT".

[Cthulhu D]

gwnn, on 2012-July-10, 08:23, said:

Because "forcing to 4m" would be a misnomer too maybe "forcing to 3NT"? I think best would be "forcing to game or 4 of a minor".

Forcing to 3NT makes sense and I find the good out find/replace action in my partnership notes after getting passed in 4m with a new partner. The target window is to small compared to the benefit of letting opener sandbag a bit. I only did some basic sims but I reckon any hand that wants to stop in 4m wants to punt 3NT, especially at IMPs.

[mikestar13]

helene_t, on 2012-July-10, 08:18, said:

I would be dissapointed if p passed me in 4m in a GF auction. OK, maybe if my hand was tightly limited. But then again he might pass me in 3M by the same token.

Why not use the words correctly? GF means GF and "forcing to 4m" means "forcing to 4m".

Nobody plays forcing to 4m, which would indicate 4m is passable but 3NT is not (at least to a very fair number of players). When we have a minor suit fit isn't 3NT at least a possible contract? The distinction is between is game forcing and forcing to 3NT (which does indicate 4m is passable). Where a minor suit is not a possible contract (for example partner opens 1NT and you show game values with 5-5 majors) the distinction is meaningless, and as this type of situaton is not uncommon, it contributes to players and writers being careless in their terminology. I do think that it would be great if there were some standardization of terminology.

[helene_t]

yes my mistake, it should be "forcing to 3NT".

[mikl_plkcc]

There is a very common scenario where an auction which is forcing to 3NT may stop at the 4 of the minor:
1. Opener bids.
2. Partner, having lots of HCPs, make a bid "forcing to 3NT".
3. Opponents come in and find their fit.
4. We find our minor suit fit. With fits on both side and no stoppers in their suit, 3NT is definitely not possible.
5. We think that we don't have enough values to go to 5 of the minor.