Chew the Fat! > Sleight of Hand
Opener's reverse: Definition
wackojack:
When opener's rebid is above the same suit simple rebid it is called a reverse. It says nothing about extra strength or length but has definite implications.
Take 1 !C - 1 !S - 2 !D in a natural sequence. Opener's "same suit rebid barrier" is 2 !C. The rebid of 2 !D is above this barrier and so is a reverse. The implications of this reverse is that opener needs extra strength to find the right contract if responder has 5 or 6 points. Another general implication is that the first bid suit will be longer than the 2nd bid suit. It seems (from the opinions given by kibs in Donnas iac session) that this 2nd implication is disputed for a 1-4-4-4 distribution. Nevertheless the fact that it is a reverse has to be indisputable.
Take again 1 !C - 1 !S - 2 !D but this time you are playing transfer responses to 1 !C whereby 1 !D shows !Hs; 1 !H shows !S s; and 1 !S shows !Ds. This is still a reverse of course. However, the implications are totally different. The 2 !D bid implies a minimum opener with 5 !Cs + 4 !D s and of course is not forcing. Responder will pass with most hands with fewer than 12 points.
Ofcourse if you are playing 5542 then the 2 !D rebid would not imply 5 !C +4 !D. This hand could have 4 !D and only 2 !Cs. Nevertheless it is by definition a reverse.
kenberg:
I see it as follows, pretty much as you do:
There are two questions
1. What is the definition of a reverse?
2. What does it show?
Bridge World Standard appears to take the same view:
"Opener's reverse of the form one diamond — two clubs — two of a major does not promise extra values and is ambiguous as to diamond length."
Thus 1 !D - 2 !C - 2 !H is a reverse because 2 !H goes beyond 2 !D, but, for BWS anyway, it does not show extra strength. This came up in the Donna hands and it is true that not everyone plays this the same way.
Here is the hand from Donna's session:
!S AQT6
!H AQ85
!D KQ43
!C J
!S K743
!H 764
!D T
!C AKQ87
I gave this hand to the robots and the auction began 1 !D - 2 !C - 2 !H.
The robots tell you what their bids mean. The 2 !H was described as
"3+ diamonds, 4+ hearts, 16-22 total points" (total points include points for shape and fit).
Otoh, I took a look at the computer disc I have where Mike Lawrence gives his views on 2/1. His views are closer to BWS (and to mine). I'll summarize from memory:
A. After 1 !D -2 !C, opener should prioritize clarifying diamond length since 1 !D is often on four cards and can be on three. ML says that if opener has 5+ diamonds his rebid should be 2 !D. But one of the things I like (maybe others hate) is that he feels free to violate his own rules. He later gives a hand where despite having five diamonds he regards a rebid of 2NT as preferable. But usually with 5+ diamonds his choice is to bid 2 !D
B. As with BWS, for ML the auction 1 !D - 2 !C - 2 !H does not show extras. But he also plays that 1 !D - 2 !C - 2NT does not deny a major. I think of ML as very practical. If it begins 1 !D - 2 !C and opener has four hearts he looks at his hand to see if, from what he can see, NT might be a good spot. If so, he is free to skip over the heart suit and bid 2NT. Responder, holding four hears, can still bid 3 !H. So the general idea is: After 1 !D - 2 !C we look for where we belong. Bidding 2 !H says "I have four hearts and I am wary of NT) while bidding 2NT says "I might or might not have a four card major but if we don't have a major suit fit I think NT should be fine".
The full robt auction on the Donna hand went 1 !D - 2 !C - 2 !H - 2 !S - 4NT - 5 !H - 6 !S.
I am not so fond of the 4NT. It seems to me that there could be a hand where opener lacks four spades but want to bid an invitational 4NT. Why not raise 2 !S to 3 !S, setting trump, and then next time bid a clear RKC bid of 4NT? In fact, one could make the argument that since opener had the option of setting trump with 3 !S and he chose not to do that, therefore the 4NT is not RKC for spades. But 4NT was the bid by opener robot and understood by responder robot.
I chose the maybe not so good rebid of 2NT over 2 !H, Blu bid his spades, we got to 6 !S, but maybe I should have bid 2 !S over 2 !H. If I do, I really think the next bid by opener should be 3 !S.
PS This idea that 1 !D - 2 !C - 2 !H does not show extra values reflects the fact that the 2 !C call already showed that responder has good values. If the auction begins 1 !D - 1 !S then responder might have very little. So surely 2 !H has to be on extras. How much extra gets debated, and what happens next gets debated, but definitely 1 !D - 1 !S - 2 !H shows extras. It is after 1 !D - 2 !C that many, including me, play that 2 !H does not show extras.
Masse24:
Yup . . . Pretty much what Ken wrote.
Mike Lawrence has a nice summary on his CD, as Ken described. I believe the phrase that he uses, when describing opener's 2 !D (with 5+) rebid in a GF 1 !D - 2 !C auction is: "opener's first priority." In doing so, you never lose a major fit since you do not deny a four card major. Responder, knowing this, will bid a major if he has one.
Is this (rebid of 2 !D with 5+) universal? No, but I believe it to be common enough that I would call it standard. Or, at least more standard than other methods. I recall researching this auction for hours about ten years ago. In doing so I ran across one of Steve Robinson's articles where he polls about two dozen world class players. Many of them agreed. Lawrence, Katz, Cohen, Bergen come to mind from memory. There were others as well. Unfortunately, these articles have been removed, but can be found using the Wayback Machine.
As to the question, is 1 !D - 2 !C - 2 !H a reverse? Sure it is. The important question, however, is: what does it show? Shape? Extras?
Similar to the auction 1 !H - 2 !D - 2 !S being a reverse or not. Of course it is. The questions to answer though, are: What does it show? Shape? Extras? I think far more 2/1 players would answer "no" to the question of extras or not. But again, not universal.
Gavin Wolpert, who was mentioned briefly yesterday, also espouses this method. A four slide recap of this is below.
kenberg:
Donna's sessions can lead to good discussions.
I think Mike Lawrence and Gavin Wolpert would disagree about the hand in the lower left corner of that four slide recap. If I understood ML correctly that's the sort of hand where ML would skip over the hearts and bid 2NT. Nothing to stop them from finding hearts on the next round, but NT looks like a fine strain whenever there is not a major suit fit available.
These are subtle points, not everyone agrees. But while it is not universal to play that 1 !D - 2 !c - 2 !H can be done with nothing extra, just showing the hearts, I do believe that it's pretty widespread to play it that way.
I repeat: Donna's hands can lead to good discussions.
Masse24:
--- Quote from: kenberg on March 25, 2022, 08:44:48 PM ---
I think Mike Lawrence and Gavin Wolpert would disagree about the hand in the lower left corner of that four slide recap. If I understood ML correctly that's the sort of hand where ML would skip over the hearts and bid 2NT. Nothing to stop them from finding hearts on the next round, but NT looks like a fine strain whenever there is not a major suit fit available.
--- End quote ---
Possibly. I seem to recall, as you wrote above, that Lawrence permits one to ski off-piste with the right hand. I believe the words he chose were along the lines of, "if it feels like no-trump, bid no trump."
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version