|
This is in response to your question: I've seen Fourth Suit Forcing
played two ways. Some play the convention as forcing to game while others
play it only as one round force. Which method is better?
Bridge players are creative types, some mavericks, some following one
approach or another, and on a precious few methods everyone actually is in
agreement.
Fortunately, the Fourth Suit Forcing question generally breaks down into the
two groups you mentioned. Usually when you see a convention as
Fourth Suit Forcing played more than one way, it implies each method has
advantages and disadvantages. That's certainly true with Fourth Suit
Forcing. Here's a rundown of
what several leading teachers feel:
Game forcing: Marty Bergen (Better
Bidding With Bergen, Mike Lawrence (Conventions CD Software), Audrey
Grant (Commonly
Used Conventions), Barbara Seagram/Marc Smith (25 Bridge
Conventions You Should Know)
One round forcing: Max Hardy (Standard
Bridge Bidding for the 21st Century), Frank Stewart (Becoming a Bridge Expert),
Bridge
World Standard
Mike Lawrence does a good job summing up the game forcing argument, saying:
My big objection to one round forcing is that they will come with
exceptions. You will end up with lots of little rules to remember. I am
fully prepared to play either way but when I do, they always seem to require
a little extra discussion.
The Bridge World Standard indeed discusses these exceptions - when fourth
suit forcing is one round versus when it's game forcing...
In summary, as long as a partnership is willing to delve into the nuances
and subtleties of invitational versus game forcing sequences, the more
sophisticated one round forcing can work well. But if the extra memory work
and pre-game discussions and agreements are a premium, it's often best to
stick to fourth suit game forcing. |
