[Stephen Tu]

Quote

3. the auction 1♣ 1♥ 2♠ is not a reverse or, more accurately, not the type of reverse I was speaking of. This is a jump-reverse: an absolute game force.

I think the more common terminology is "jump-shift", jump-reverse would be reserved for auctions like 1♣-1♠-3♦.
reverse = non-jump bid in new suit, suits bid out of economical order so that preference would require partner to bid to higher level
jump shift = jump in new suit, where just bidding new suit cheaply is not a reverse.
jump reverse = jump in suit where just bidding it cheaply would be a reverse

Quote

i have seen some intermediate players claim that the jumpshift can be played as merely a one-round force, but there are profound systemic reasons why that is unplayable in a standard method...

Again, I think "unplayable" is an overstatement. However, I do believe that the vast majority of intermediate players claiming that the jump shift is only a one-round force only do so out of ignorance rather than because they are knowingly using some special treatment with agreement from their partner. J.S = game force should be assumed, & absolutely standard, without some very special agreements.

But a regular partnership with special agreements can do some interesting things with j.s. = one round force ...

Quote

If I held Jxxx Qxxxx QJx x and heard partner jump reverse into 2♠, I'd bid 4♠. We

There's an argument for not ever jump raising partner's jump shift suit, and not treating the single raise as unambiguously being a slam try -- such suits occasionally turn out to be fragments (3 cds) rather than actual 4 cd suits. Since the jump shift is the only forcing call by opener in std, with some one suiters (3-3-0-7?) opener might be manufacturing a jump shift suit in order to create a force. Bidding 3♠ only would leave room for opener to bid 4♥ with such a hand.

Since one is always going to game after a std jump shift, there is less need for a negative than after a reverse, which would stop in a partial with reasonably large frequency. One can cover slam/not slam by refusing to cooperate with cue-bids subsequently. Opener shouldn't drive beyond game w/o responder cooperation, since the jump shift already shows substantial values, and has limited the hand to a reasonably small 19-22 range.

[mikeh]

cherdano, on Mar 5 2007, 05:48 PM, said:

I admit I am surprised about this. My understanding of Ingberman was always similar to Lebensohl: It is a puppet to the next step, and opener only breaks the puppet if he has a GF hand. So 1D 1S 2H 2N 3C would be completely artificial, denying substantial extras, while 1D 1S 2H 2N 3D would be a game force.

My treatment may be idiosyncratic. While I am comfortable that most of my description of reverse bidding (eg. size and shape requirments) represetns mainstream North American expert treatments, my description of Ingberman is based more on personal experience, sicen it rarely comes up when I play it with an unfamiliar partner: we may agree to play Ingberman, but not have it arise.

Anyway, my understanding, subject to that qualification, is that 2N, when used whether as Ingberman or as the lebensohl-type weakness bid is a request to bid 3♣, but that opener rejects the request with a hand type that does not want to play in 3♣. Thus with a 2=5=6=0 hand, there is no way I am accepting the puppet! And my 3♥ bid (which is what I would usually bid with this shape) is not forcing. Similarly with 2=4=6=1 I would rebid 3♦, nonforcing, but with 1=4=6=2 I'd bid 3♣.

I confess I may be mistaken/misguided and I would welcome input from other experienced Ingberman users.

[mikeh]

Stephen Tu, on Mar 5 2007, 06:07 PM, said:

Quote

3. the auction 1♣ 1♥ 2♠ is not a reverse or, more accurately, not the type of reverse I was speaking of. This is a jump-reverse: an absolute game force.

I think the more common terminology is "jump-shift", jump-reverse would be reserved for auctions like 1♣-1♠-3♦.
reverse = non-jump bid in new suit, suits bid out of economical order so that preference would require partner to bid to higher level
jump shift = jump in new suit, where just bidding new suit cheaply is not a reverse.
jump reverse = jump in suit where just bidding it cheaply would be a reverse

Quote

i have seen some intermediate players claim that the jumpshift can be played as merely a one-round force, but there are profound systemic reasons why that is unplayable in a standard method...

Again, I think "unplayable" is an overstatement. However, I do believe that the vast majority of intermediate players claiming that the jump shift is only a one-round force only do so out of ignorance rather than because they are knowingly using some special treatment with agreement from their partner. J.S = game force should be assumed, & absolutely standard, without some very special agreements.

But a regular partnership with special agreements can do some interesting things with j.s. = one round force ...

Quote

If I held Jxxx Qxxxx QJx x and heard partner jump reverse into 2♠, I'd bid 4♠. We

There's an argument for not ever jump raising partner's jump shift suit, and not treating the single raise as unambiguously being a slam try -- such suits occasionally turn out to be fragments (3 cds) rather than actual 4 cd suits. Since the jump shift is the only forcing call by opener in std, with some one suiters (3-3-0-7?) opener might be manufacturing a jump shift suit in order to create a force. Bidding 3♠ only would leave room for opener to bid 4♥ with such a hand.

Since one is always going to game after a std jump shift, there is less need for a negative than after a reverse, which would stop in a partial with reasonably large frequency. One can cover slam/not slam by refusing to cooperate with cue-bids subsequently. Opener shouldn't drive beyond game w/o responder cooperation, since the jump shift already shows substantial values, and has limited the hand to a reasonably small 19-22 range.

I don't mind the corrections in terminology, but I do ask that you consider that this whole thread was started explicitly to give an introduction to reverse bidding, in a narrowly defined area of reverse bidding.... aimed at the intermediate or beginner player. Suggesting non-mainstream opinions as reasons to say I am wrong or suggesting that sophisticated partnerships can use Jumpshifts as less than gf if they have special agreements is, with respect, not the type of post that should be put here.

While I am the first to argue that B/I players should learn good bridge basics rather than fundamentally flawed methods that require a complete start-over as they advance, that is not the same as saying that B/I players should always be told, when learning good bridge basics, that some minority opinions use different methods that they should learn as well. So please, let me suggest that you elaborate elsewhere on out-of-the mainstream views when responding to an introductory (altho perhaps information-dense) post on a subjecr on which many B/I players are already confused enough.

As for the terminology, it may be that you and phil are correct, but maybe it is a regional variation. Anyway, I would call a jump into a higher ranking suit a jump reverse and a jump into a lower suit as a jumpshift: the reverse in the former case because responder has to increase the level of the bidding in order to preference to opener's first suit: the defining requirement of a reverse, to my way of thinking. I don't frankly care.

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

So please, let me suggest that you elaborate elsewhere on out-of-the mainstream views when responding to an introductory (altho perhaps information-dense) post on a subjecr on which many B/I players are already confused enough.

Let me suggest, that you can state the standard way of doing things without having to make false statements about the non-existence or unplayability of other methods. Just say "with standard agreements", yada yada yada applies. Or say stuff like "usually", or "most of the time", or "vast majority of the time". Don't even mention the other possibilities. If you hadn't, I wouldn't have brought them up.

But you yourself brought up the other possibilities and dismissed them as unplayable. I don't think this is right, even w/ a beginner/int audience. You can tell them what standard is & what to expect without saying that other ways just don't work, or that there is no room for exceptions whatsoever. Also, your ideas about what is mainstream & what is not may not be perfectly accurate in all cases ...

Your posts here are excellent & have a ton of useful info, but I'd like them better with the inaccurate complete dismissal of other possibilities excised.

[awm]

There was a very good question in this thread raised by DWM that never really got answered.

Suppose that opener reverses and responder makes either:

(1) The "weakness-showing" artificial bid of the fourth suit (ingberman) or 2NT (lebensohl).
(2) The "could be weak" natural rebid of his major suit.

At this point, which continuations by opener are forcing and which are not? For example:

1♦ - 1♠ - 2♥ - 2NT

The 2NT call is supposed to ask opener to rebid 3♣, after which responder can pass holding garbage with long clubs and shorter spades, or responder can bid 3♦/3♥ as a signoff. What does it mean if opener does not bid 3♣? Is his call just "shape-showing"? What if opener actually has 22 hcp and really wants to force game unilaterally? For example:

Is 3♦ just showing a shapely hand (say 6+♦ and 4♥) and passable, or is it forcing?
Does 3♥ show a (possibly sub-) minimum 5-6 or is it forcing?
Is 3♠ forcing? Is this the normal bid on a 3451 16-count? What about a 3451 21-count?
What does 3NT by opener promise about his club holding, if anything?

[tmgrl4]

Mikeh....I loved your long first post. I am a true beginner and never understood the concept of reverse AT ALL until your post.

While I read the other posts, which contain info way above my level, what I remember when I read your post, is ....

In bridge, there is "usually" rather than "always."

Thank you!!

terri

[bucky]

Nice introductory post to the topic of reverse. What about reverse sequences that only involve 2 suits, i.e. 1X - 1NT - 2Y, where Y is a higher-ranking suit than X? I'd like to hear about the standard/expert treatment, as well as other useful (albeit non-mainstream) offering.

[mikeh]

A number of people have suggested that after 1♥  1N,  2♠ be used as an artificial bid.

One suggestion I have seen is that this be played as a puppet to 2N, over which opener clarifies his hand type. This has the advantage of allowing direct jumps to 3minor, over 1N, to carry tighter and perhaps fundamentally different meanings than the traditional (in std or 2/1) of absolute gf, with 3♣ often a fake suit. For example, one could now define all immediate jumps as gf but promising at least 5-5 in the 2 suits, making responder's decisions about raising the 2nd suit with, say, 3 card support easier than when the suit could be 4 cards or, especially with clubs, 3 or even fewer.

Since I don't play this, I haven't spent any time discussing the ramifications with anyone experienced with these methods. One point, tho: if you adopt this, you had better have an agreement about how you bid 5=6 majors....tho this is a rare hand-type, it will arise from time to time.

Also: if you use 2♠ as a puppet, is it ever based on a good hand with 4=5=2=2/4=5=(31)? If so, how do you clarify?

Also: how far is 2♠, whether artificial or natural, forcing (in the scheme to which I referred above, it may be best played as gf).

As for other reverses:

Many players, me included, use a 1N response to 1♣ as showing 8-10 and this is almost always 3=3=4=3 or 3=3=3=4, altho some (32)=4=4 hands will qualify as may some 5332's with 5 weak clubs especially if 1♣ could be 4=4=3=2.

So for me, a reverse over 1N will be gf, simply because responder is marked with values.

After 1♦, a reverse into 2Major will not be, in itself, gf. I would do it on many non-minimum 5=6 hands...only with minimums would I open 1major. So I would play ingberman or lebensohl (preferably ingberman) here.

Hope that helps.

[mgoetze]

Maybe someone could clarify what the fourth-suit bid means if playing Lebensohl/Ingberman and 2NT is available to show weakness. For instance, the bidding goes 1♥-2♦-2♠-3♣. Does this ask for a stopper, show a stopper, or is it a natural (and if so does it show 4+ or 5+)?

[hanp]

Your auction is very different from the ingberman/lebensohl auctions that have been discussed in this thread. Whether you play that 2D shows a gameforce or not, clearly 2S set a gameforce so nobody in their right mind would use 2NT as lebensohl there.

Perhaps you meant to ask about an auction such as 1D - 1S - 2H - 3C..

There I prefer to play that 3C is gameforcing without a better bid. Therefore it denies 5 spades (else 2S or 3S), 4 hearts (else 3H) or 3 diamonds (else 3D) and thus at least 4 clubs. It doesn't show or deny a club stopper.

A possible hand is Kxxx Qxx Kx Axxx. Although I play that a jump to 3NT shows 11-12 HCP, I wouldn't use it on a hand as suitable for other contracts as this one. If partner bids 3NT I would pass, but over any other rebid I would not bid 3NT.

[mgoetze]

hanp, on May 24 2010, 01:13 PM, said:

Your auction is very different from the ingberman/lebensohl auctions that have been discussed in this thread. Whether you play that 2D shows a gameforce or not, clearly 2S set a gameforce so nobody in their right mind would use 2NT as lebensohl there.

Perhaps you meant to ask about an auction such as 1D - 1S - 2H - 3C..

There I prefer to play that 3C is gameforcing without a better bid. Therefore it denies 5 spades (else 2S or 3S), 4 hearts (else 3H) or 3 diamonds (else 3D) and thus at least 4 clubs. It doesn't show or deny a club stopper.

A possible hand is Kxxx Qxx Kx Axxx. Although I play that a jump to 3NT shows 11-12 HCP, I wouldn't use it on a hand as suitable for other contracts as this one. If partner bids 3NT I would pass, but over any other rebid I would not bid 3NT.

Yes, sorry, 2/1 auctions are different of course. So, right, 1♦-1♠-2♥-3♣.

Do you bid differently with Kxxx Qxx Kx KJTx?

[hanp]

Yes I think that that hand is almost perfect for the jump to 3NT, if you have agreed it shows 11-12 or course. With less I'd start with 2NT and rebid 3NT.

[kgr]

hanp, on May 24 2010, 02:20 PM, said:

Yes I think that that hand is almost perfect for the jump to 3NT, if you have agreed it shows 11-12 or course. With less I'd start with 2NT and rebid 3NT.

I wonder what expert standard is.
I play that 3NT is to play (max 11HCP) and 2NT..3NT is 12-14, 2NT..4NT is 15-16

[bluecalm]

It was pointed out that I should educate myself as to reverses so I am reading this great thread

My question is:
If you play "strong reverse" as you call it what do you bid with:

x AJxx AKJxx Qxx or:
x AJxx AKJxx QJx

after:

1♦ - 1♠
????

[mikeh]

bluecalm, on Sep 2 2010, 09:08 AM, said:

It was pointed out that I should educate myself as to reverses so I am reading this great thread

My question is:
If you play "strong reverse" as you call it what do you bid with:

x AJxx AKJxx Qxx or:
x AJxx AKJxx QJx

after:

1♦ - 1♠
????

one popular method is to bid 2♣. Indeed, this was espoused many years ago by such as Al Roth, and was a staple of the BW MSC for a long time (and probably still would be for many panelists if they posted this sort of hand type)

As Roth used to say: if I can get by this round......

[bluecalm]

I didn't except this answer (2♣) so I need to change hands a bit o illustrate the problem I had in mind.
What about 2-4-5-2 with 15-16hcp ?
Say something like:

Ax KJxx AKxxx xx
Ax KQxx AKxxx xx ?

[gwnn]

you open 1N with those

[bluecalm]

Ok, so I open 1NT with every 2-4-5-2 15-16.
Rebid 2♣ with 1-4-5-3 15-16 and happily reverse with 3-4-5-1 as my hand is supposedly stronger having support for partner suit.
Is that right ?

[gwnn]

That sounds right to me. Maybe not mikeh. However, for one reason or another, I don't recall ever rebidding this funky 2C bid either because I reversed or rebid 1N or something. I don't know.

I'd bid 1D and 2H with some 5422's with 16 if the doubletons started getting too small and therefore my suits better and better.

[bluecalm]

Quote

I don't recall ever rebidding this funky 2C bid either

I think the reason is that auction:
1♦ - 1♠
2♥

Is quite rare.
My very quick simul shows it arises once in every 1100 hands and that's not counting opponents/partner starting the bidding, overcalling or partner being 5♣-4♠ 12+ (so he starts with 2♣).
Probably once in every 1500 hands is closer to real frequency which makes it one in every 50 matchpoint sessions. On many of those hands you have easy rebid too.