Is This The Right Room For An Argument?

[han]

There are several benefits to the approach of reverses not showing extras that haven't been acknowledged here:

 

(1) Rebidding the major unambiguously shows six. This makes it easier to find 6-2 major fit games and slams, as well as diagnosing a 6-3 or 6-4 major fit more easily. It's pretty hard to unambiguously agree the major at the three level after 1M-2X-2M punt.

 

This is only true if you agree that 3-level bids also don't show extras and that you can rebid 2NT with xxx in one or two unbid suits and that you can raise with a minimum 5332 hand. If you agree to do all of these things, yes then 2M shows 6 but that's a large price to pay: much more than the reverse not showing extras.

 

(2) With weakish 5-5 hands, you may never be able to bid the second suit if you start with a 2M rebid. For example 1♠-2♥ and opener holds 5-5 in the blacks. Rebidding 2♠ "because the hand isn't strong enough to reverse" could easily lead to 3♥ from partner and the clubs will never get mentioned. Now it's hard to even determine whether 3NT is playable (say opener has no diamond stop).

 

True, playing the style you are arguing for you rebid 3C on the 5-5 hands, but you also rebid it on a poor 4-card suit, for example with AQJxx Kx xx Qxxx (or do you bid 2NT with that, yuck!). So it becomes hard for responder to take the 3m bid seriously: it doesn't show shape nor strength and takes up a lot more room.

 

(3) You can always use a fourth suit bid as "do you have extras" or play serious/nonserious 3NT. There are other ways to look for extra strength. The early bids of the auction should be focused on finding the best strain rather than determining who has extras.

 

I agree with you that modern methods can help you when you do find a major suit fit. It is tougher when you don't, especially when your high reverse takes up a lot of room (e.g. 1S-2H-3D giving very little information).

 

Of course, as a devoted player of the superior methods where 2/1 bids are not necessarily game forcing I have to play reverses show extras.

 

Then you are lucky that you can't become a victim of your own arguments above(joke). I think a better way to deal with the problems you mention above is to have responder bid 2NT often so that opener can clarify.

[han]

No body with half the brain winstomn has could play it as no extra strenght, bidding the same with 11 or 19 is so idiotic.

Fortunately such bodies can only be found in the zoo and they don't play bridge you moron.

[Guest Jlall]

(1) Rebidding the major unambiguously shows six. This makes it easier to find 6-2 major fit games and slams, as well as diagnosing a 6-3 or 6-4 major fit more easily. It's pretty hard to unambiguously agree the major at the three level after 1M-2X-2M punt.

 

This is only true if you agree that 3-level bids also don't show extras and that you can rebid 2NT with xxx in one or two unbid suits and that you can raise with a minimum 5332 hand. If you agree to do all of these things, yes then 2M shows 6 but that's a large price to pay: much more than the reverse not showing extras.

Interestingly, Meckwell swear by this style, in the context of a strong club system. It seems theoretically unplayable to me even in a strong club context but obviously its not since they pwn... However in a natural system it would be even harder to pull off.

[mike777]

Again why not just rebid a 3 card minor,with ordinary opener, if you do not have a 6 card major or solid 5 card major to rebid?

1H=2c=2d(may be 3 card minor)

xx...AKJxx..AQx...xxx

 

That would mean you would need to rebid 2nt after say:

1H=2D=2nt

 

With xx.....AKxxx...xx.....AQJx

[han]

(1) Rebidding the major unambiguously shows six. This makes it easier to find 6-2 major fit games and slams, as well as diagnosing a 6-3 or 6-4 major fit more easily. It's pretty hard to unambiguously agree the major at the three level after 1M-2X-2M punt.

 

This is only true if you agree that 3-level bids also don't show extras and that you can rebid 2NT with xxx in one or two unbid suits and that you can raise with a minimum 5332 hand. If you agree to do all of these things, yes then 2M shows 6 but that's a large price to pay: much more than the reverse not showing extras.

Interestingly, Meckwell swear by this style, in the context of a strong club system. It seems theoretically unplayable to me even in a strong club context but obviously its not since they pwn... However in a natural system it would be even harder to pull off.

I think playing strong club makes quite a difference. I'm going to send a question to WWJD to see if Meckstroth would play this style when playing 2/1.

[Guest Jlall]

I think playing strong club makes quite a difference.

I agree

[mike777]

I do and think you can play that meckwell style also if you assume that opener will have the weaker hand very often. That makes responder hand a pretty solid hand to game force with. My guess this is the same philosophy as meckwell, their 2/1 game force hands are pretty good.

[Winstonm]

Reverses in a 2/1 show extras. Not the values for a 1/1/2 reverse, but at least a King better than a minimum.

Who the hell made you king of all bridge knowledge!!! :P :)

[Winstonm]

There are several benefits to the approach of reverses not showing extras that haven't been acknowledged here:

 

(1) Rebidding the major unambiguously shows six. This makes it easier to find 6-2 major fit games and slams, as well as diagnosing a 6-3 or 6-4 major fit more easily. It's pretty hard to unambiguously agree the major at the three level after 1M-2X-2M punt.

 

(2) With weakish 5-5 hands, you may never be able to bid the second suit if you start with a 2M rebid. For example 1♠-2♥ and opener holds 5-5 in the blacks. Rebidding 2♠ "because the hand isn't strong enough to reverse" could easily lead to 3♥ from partner and the clubs will never get mentioned. Now it's hard to even determine whether 3NT is playable (say opener has no diamond stop).

 

(3) You can always use a fourth suit bid as "do you have extras" or play serious/nonserious 3NT. There are other ways to look for extra strength. The early bids of the auction should be focused on finding the best strain rather than determining who has extras.

 

Of course, as a devoted player of the superior methods where 2/1 bids are not necessarily game forcing I have to play reverses show extras.

Aha! The weasle approach to answering. :)

[Winstonm]

It is good that people play it as showing just shape since it helps me find beginners wich I can proudly double, or just eject form the table. No body with half the brain winstomn has could play it as no extra strenght, bidding the same with 11 or 19 is so idiotic.

 

About those 6-2 things, every system has been developed because of a real concrete hand that failed, there you get yours. Sensible people use some gadgets to help here, but people who just wanna bid their suits at any price will not care about them.

Balderdash! Typical Fluf nonsese. :)

 

Of course it should be played no extras - the game force has already been created so that eliminates the 11 count.

 

Must be European. :P

[Winstonm]

No body with half the brain winstomn has could play it as no extra strenght, bidding the same with 11 or 19 is so idiotic.

Fortunately such bodies can only be found in the zoo and they don't play bridge you moron.

:P :D :) :P :D :P

[Winstonm]

(1) Rebidding the major unambiguously shows six. This makes it easier to find 6-2 major fit games and slams, as well as diagnosing a 6-3 or 6-4 major fit more easily. It's pretty hard to unambiguously agree the major at the three level after 1M-2X-2M punt.

 

This is only true if you agree that 3-level bids also don't show extras and that you can rebid 2NT with xxx in one or two unbid suits and that you can raise with a minimum 5332 hand. If you agree to do all of these things, yes then 2M shows 6 but that's a large price to pay: much more than the reverse not showing extras.

Interestingly, Meckwell swear by this style, in the context of a strong club system. It seems theoretically unplayable to me even in a strong club context but obviously its not since they pwn... However in a natural system it would be even harder to pull off.

I am so sick and tired of hearing this crap...Meckwell this, Meckwell that, Meckwell says..... still only halfway to Garozzo's total wins ... of course, carrying around those lame teammates, Soloway/Hamman, adds a bit to their legend, but it doesn't make them the Bridge Encyclopedia, for crying out loud. :)

 

Doesn't anyone here have their own brain???? What the hell would you do if you had never heard of these two chumps? er...champs... :P

[Winstonm]

I think playing strong club makes quite a difference.

I agree

No, you don't.

[kenrexford]

For several years, I experimented with a partnership agreement where even non-reverses in a 2/1 GF auction showed extra stuff. E.g., 1♠-P-2♣-P-2♦. Opener's 2♦ guaranteed a non-minimum. Opener would bid 2♠ with a minimum, even if 5-5, 6-5, whatever, extremely distributional if he was a Rule-of-Almost-Twenty opener.

 

Any non-rebid of Opener's own suit showed 15+ HCP's or a six-loser hand.

 

This actually worked fairly well. I'd guage it as the second-best option. The best is for Opener to bid 2♦ after 2♣ whenever plausible and for reverses (and high-reverses) to actually show something.

 

Pattern first is idiotic (following the spirit here), unless one uses the grimace, the fast signoff, and the head scratch to distinguish strengths.

[mike777]

For several years, I experimented with a partnership agreement where even non-reverses in a 2/1 GF auction showed extra stuff. E.g., 1♠-P-2♣-P-2♦. Opener's 2♦ guaranteed a non-minimum. Opener would bid 2♠ with a minimum, even if 5-5, 6-5, whatever, extremely distributional if he was a Rule-of-Almost-Twenty opener.

 

Any non-rebid of Opener's own suit showed 15+ HCP's or a six-loser hand.

 

This actually worked fairly well. I'd guage it as the second-best option. The best is for Opener to bid 2♦ after 2♣ whenever plausible and for reverses (and high-reverses) to actually show something.

 

Pattern first is idiotic (following the spirit here), unless one uses the grimace, the fast signoff, and the head scratch to distinguish strengths.

Not idiotic if you assume responder will have the stronger hand very often.

Otherwise you comments seem very playable. :)

[Winstonm]

For several years, I experimented with a partnership agreement where even non-reverses in a 2/1 GF auction showed extra stuff. E.g., 1♠-P-2♣-P-2♦. Opener's 2♦ guaranteed a non-minimum. Opener would bid 2♠ with a minimum, even if 5-5, 6-5, whatever, extremely distributional if he was a Rule-of-Almost-Twenty opener.

 

Any non-rebid of Opener's own suit showed 15+ HCP's or a six-loser hand.

 

This actually worked fairly well. I'd guage it as the second-best option. The best is for Opener to bid 2♦ after 2♣ whenever plausible and for reverses (and high-reverses) to actually show something.

 

Pattern first is idiotic (following the spirit here), unless one uses the grimace, the fast signoff, and the head scratch to distinguish strengths.

 

Not idiotic if you assume responder will have the stronger hand very often.

Otherwise you comments seem very playable. 

 

This reminds me of the Jerry Springer Show - fool #1, meet fool #2. :P :) :D

[Stephen Tu]

Not idiotic if you assume responder will have the stronger hand very often

 

How does that solve anything? Responder has something like a 16 count. He assumes opener is minimum. So he bids 3nt rather than fish for a minor suit slam. Opener has also has a 16-17 count. He has to assume responder could be minimum. He passes also. A good slam is missed.

 

Or, if you say opener has to bid again, what does opener do with 18-19? What if he only needs responder to have a slightly better than minimum GF rather than a full ace or so higher?

 

And sometimes, if you have 16-17 and make another try, 4nt goes down after partner declines, which is catastrophic.

 

Keeping the bidding low rather than reversing & consuming space gives a better chance of sorting these issues out.

[mike777]

Not idiotic if you assume responder will have the stronger hand very often

 

How does that solve anything? Responder has something like a 16 count. He assumes opener is minimum. So he bids 3nt rather than fish for a minor suit slam. Opener has also has a 16-17 count. He has to assume responder could be minimum. He passes also. A good slam is missed.

 

Or, if you say opener has to bid again, what does opener do with 18-19? What if he only needs responder to have a slightly better than minimum GF rather than a full ace or so higher?

 

And sometimes, if you have 16-17 and make another try, 4nt goes down after partner declines, which is catastrophic.

 

Keeping the bidding low rather than reversing & consuming space gives a better chance of sorting these issues out.

Lets keep in mind with this style we assume responder has bigger hand very very often compared to opener.

 

 

1)yes he assumes responder is minimum...14-15 hcp..what is your point?

2) with 18-19 balanced he opens 2d..otherwise in any case...slam is easy...the issue is grand slam

3) keep in mind responder 2/1 shows 14+ hcp ok?

4) what hands are you worried about? In any case expect better than 70% accuracy. Anything above 70% is super, great.....

[dcvetkov]

3) keep in mind responder 2/1 shows 14+ hcp ok?

14 HCP + for 2/1?

 

I guess one have to wait a lot of time to get the lucky number 14... and what does he do with 13, or good 12? 1NT forcing? Invitational jumps?

 

Which reminds me of one of the disadvantages of light 1st and 2nd openings....

Responder never knows when to take you seriously or he should assume 11 with the opener always ... In this case he will have a lot of awkward hands in the 12-13 range with a no good rebid. 1NT with 13?? grrr, I know I am not in that camp

[twcho]

With the modern trend of lighter and lighter opening, responder does need a better hand for GF particularly when no fit is found yet. With a mediocre 13 pts with no fit with pd's opening M, one may need to choose the low path rather than 2/1. And that's the trade off for the more aggressive opening style.

[Fluffy]

It is good that people play it as showing just shape since it helps me find beginners wich I can proudly double, or just eject form the table. No body with half the brain winstomn has could play it as no extra strenght, bidding the same with 11 or 19 is so idiotic.

 

About those 6-2 things, every system has been developed because of a real concrete hand that failed, there you get yours. Sensible people use some gadgets to help here, but people who just wanna bid their suits at any price will not care about them.

Balderdash! Typical Fluf nonsese. :)

Poor foreign doesn't know what balderdash means, can someone help?

 

Of course it should be played no extras - the game force has already been created so that eliminates the 11 count.

 

I was talking about opener's range you fool!

 

Must be European.  :P

 

Many Europeans think of Spain more like a North African country rather than European.

[Fluffy]

(2) With weakish 5-5 hands, you may never be able to bid the second suit if you start with a 2M rebid. For example 1♠-2♥ and opener holds 5-5 in the blacks. Rebidding 2♠ "because the hand isn't strong enough to reverse" could easily lead to 3♥ from partner and the clubs will never get mentioned. Now it's hard to even determine whether 3NT is playable (say opener has no diamond stop).

 

True, playing the style you are arguing for you rebid 3C on the 5-5 hands, but you also rebid it on a poor 4-card suit, for example with AQJxx Kx xx Qxxx (or do you bid 2NT with that, yuck!). So it becomes hard for responder to take the 3m bid seriously: it doesn't show shape nor strength and takes up a lot more room.

Those arguments are foolish like you Han! :)

 

You can always bid your minor after rebidding 2M if partner doesn't waste your space rebidding an already 5 card suit, just rebid 2NT wich is cheaper and you will hear the minors (or a 2 card fit for your ♥s if that's what you were looking for!)

 

given said that I think 1♠-2♥-2♠-3♥ should be a 7 card suit or a self sufficent 6 card one.

[Stephen Tu]

1)yes he assumes responder is minimum...14-15 hcp..what is your point?

2) with 18-19 balanced he opens 2d..otherwise in any case...slam is easy...the issue is grand slam

3) keep in mind responder 2/1 shows 14+ hcp ok?

4) what hands are you worried about? In any case expect better than 70% accuracy. Anything above 70% is super, great.....

 

Geez, 14-15 hcp? So in your world, you need 14 hcp to open and 14 hcp to force to game? I guess you hardly ever go down this way, and since you are almost at slam when someone can open & responder can 2/1, then I suppose this show shape style can work on 2/1 auctions, since both players have a little extra to begin with & your ranges are tighter. Meanwhile, you overload your 1nt forcing response, and get hurt competitively when you have to open pass when other people can start showing their suit(s). & your passed hand auctions get hurt a bit since you have to deal with wider ranges (either that or you are missing good games & partials).

 

Meanwhile, the rest of us who open lighter & force to game lighter, need to be able to distinguish ranges. Also, most people don't play a 2d=18/19 balanced (certainly not assumed in this discussion).

 

The hands I'm worried about is when both players have about half the values needed for slam. If neither can proceed beyond game for fear the other person is minimum, slam is going to be missed. Or if one does proceed anyway, this hurts you on the next range up, since then you can only accept with substantial extra values, rather than being able to accept on a "maximum minimum".

 

Since your ranges apparently start at 14 where the rest of us are at ~12, I suppose you can probably get away with it. Sound ranges work well when both players actually are that strong. However you are probably getting hurt in accuracy and/or competitively on the more common weaker hands.

 

A large % of the time you probably are getting to the same contract. But I don't want to settle for that, I want the top for the 10% or whatever it is of slams that you are missing. Either that or the competitive advantage (IMO) of opening hands that you choose to pass with.

[mgoetze]

Meanwhile, the rest of us who open lighter & force to game lighter, need to be able to distinguish ranges.

So, in your world, you need 11 hcp to open and 11 hcp to force to game? And then you distinguish the range by seeing your 3NT go down? You dweeb!

[mgoetze]

Interestingly, Meckwell swear by this style, in the context of a strong club system.

Well, it's a matter of frequency, silly. Since those idiots open any moth-ridden collection of 10 points, they won't have any extras 80% of the time. And when they actually do have 15, and were just too chicken to open 1♣, they can just raise partner's game bid to slam, since they always know who has the queen. Stupid bums, the lot of you!