Rubinsohl tweak

[straube]

After 1N (2M) Lebensohl gives up a natural 2N and also loses an invitation in clubs. After 1N (2M) Rubinsohl gives up a natural 2N and loses the ability to compete in a suit.

 

1N (2S)

.....dbl-size ask

..........2N-minimum

...............3C-competing in clubs

...............3D-competing in diamonds

...............3H-competing in hearts

..........3C-maximum

...............P-competing in clubs

...............3D-competing in diamonds

...............3H-competing in hearts

...............3S-four hearts

...............3N-hope we have a stopper

 

1N (2H)

.....dbl-5 spades

.....2S-size ask

..........2N-weak

..........3C-strong

...............P-competing in clubs

...............3D-competing in diamonds

...............3H-4 spades

....................3S-no stopper

..........................3N-stopper

...............3S-stopper ask

...............3N-has stopper

 

What I find annoying about this is that opener will seldom be able to pass the double. I think competing in a suit needs to promise some minimum values.

I think the basic idea of Rubinsohl (showing GI+ values in a suit) is a winner because it lets opener do something useful.

[glen]

... After 1N (2M) Rubinsohl gives up a natural 2N and loses the ability to compete in a suit. ...

Do you mean compete=invite? Rubinsohl can compete=play in, using transfers to the suit to play, and has some invites.

[awm]

The way I've always played rubensohl is for example:

 

1N-(2♥):

 

2N = clubs, to play or GF

3♣ = diamonds, to play or GF

3♦ = some kind of stayman/stopper ask

3♥ = spades, at least INV (else 2♠)

3♠ = shortness hearts, GF three-suiter

 

This version has no invites except in suits that 2NT bypasses, similar to lebensohl. The advantages over lebensohl are that partner knows which suit you have (in case fourth-hand opponent raises) and right-siding some contracts.

 

There's also transfer lebensohl, which is after 1N-(2♥):

 

2N = signoff in either minor, or GF with clubs

3♣ = diamonds, INV+

3♦ = some kind of stayman/stopper ask

3♥ = spades, INV+

3♠ = shortness in hearts

 

The main advantage of transfer lebensohl (as opposed to rubensohl or regular lebensohl) is that it allows you to show any suited invite except specifically clubs. The disadvantages are that partner doesn't always know which suit you're signing off in (for competitive purposes) and that your GF with clubs auctions become more awkward (basically you have to 3NT or cue next).

[straube]

I've seen Rubinsohl used to cope with 1C interference in which it was necessary for the transfer to show at least invitational values and I think I incorrectly assumed the same was true for NT interference. Apparently most versions of Rubinsohl are only able to invite in suits higher ranking than the interference.

 

This method gets you invites with a minor and invites with hands that might have made an invitational 2N (or Stayman followed by 2N) bid. Is that worthwhile or would you prefer a penalty or negative double?

[straube]

Not even sure I like this. I'm trying here to delay the decision for whether to accept game or pass for penalties. I also miss the ability to invite with a lower ranking suit (especially hearts).

 

1N (2S)

 

dbl-an invitational hand

.....P-penalties

.....2N-weak

..........3L-natural

.....3C-strong

..........3D-5H

..........3H-4H

..........3S-stopper ask

..........3N-stopper

2N-weak or strong clubs

3C-weak or strong diamonds

3D-weak or strong hearts

3H-Stayman (4H)

.....3S-no stopper

3S-no stopper

3N-stopper

 

1N (2H)

 

dbl-an invitational hand

.....P-penalties

.....2S-weak, 4 spades

.....2N-weak

.....3C-strong

..........3D-natural

..........3H-4 spades

...............3S-no stopper

..........3S-no stopper

2S-to play

2N-clubs, weak or strong

3C-diamonds, weak or strong

3D-Stayman

3H-GI+ spades

3S-no stopper

3N-stopper

[Zelandakh]

I play my Rub very similarly to awm except that my Stayman bid is promisary, like straube's. The problem with non-promisary Stayman here is when 4th hand competes to 4H and you have to make the decision whether to bid 4S or not. You also wrong-side 4S whenever opener does not hold a stopper. However if you want to play a penalty double then having a general take-out bid is probably more important.

 

1N - (2H)

X = take-out with values

2S = competitive

2N = clubs, competitive or GF

3C = diamonds, competitive or GF

3D = Stayman promising 4 hearts (3H now is no stop and not 4 spades)

3H = spades, invitational or GF

3S = 3NT without stop

3N = 3NT with stop

 

The method you have is pretty much the same as this but with your take-out double being restricted to invitational hands and the responses to it being restricted to 2NT (Lebensohl, in effect) and 3C only. Most likely your method (and mine) is best used at IMPS while awm's is better at Pairs. No doubt some would contest that.

 

To be honest invites over 1NT are over-rated, especially after interference when you have some reasonable idea about how the hcp are distributed around the table. This is even more the case when it comes to a minor-suit invite. With hearts, if you really cannot make your mind up if you have enough for game or not (it hasn't happened yet but one day) then yes, you would need to go via a take-out/values double.

[straube]

Your structure does look pretty similar except your double is takeout (negative) and mine is GI. I suppose you're right about the GI suit hands not being too common. Seems like the 1N-2N hands come up a lot.

 

Not sure about the structure I laid out. I think it's not bad, but I'm not sure if it's worth memorizing.

[shevek]

Of course it's RubEnsohl, named for Jeff Rubens, not Ira Rubin!

Rubens introduced transfer advances to overcalls, then Australian Bruce Neill extended this to his modification of Lebensohl.

Of course, there was no Lebensohl person, though there is Ken Lebensold, who is - however - not the inventor of anything. I think George Boehm wrote the original Lebensohl article.

 

Next month ... Cappelletti

[blackshoe]

Nobody could figure out who to credit for "Lebensohl", since Lebensold denied having anything to do with it. So somebody (Boehm?) named it Lebensohl.

 

It's true that Bruce Neill developed "Rubensohl" from Lebensohl and Rubens advances. I read his original article, reprinted in Brian Senior's "The Transfer Principle". It's also true, or so I understand it, that Ira Rubin developed the same or a similar system at about the same time. Hence "Rubinsohl".

 

It's kinda like "I don't play Stayman. I play Marx." :-)

[straube]

1N (2S)

.....Rubensohl

.....dbl-GI with 2+ spades, possible other 5cd suit

.........2N-weak

...............3L-natural, nf

..........3C-strong, artificial

 

1N (2H)

.....Rubensohl

.....dbl with 2+ hearts, possible 5cd minor

..........2S-weak, 4 spades

..........2N-weak

..........3C-strong, artificial

 

This lets us double 2M cooperatively, try our chances in 2N, or leave room to uncover 4/4 or 5/3 major fits.

[Zelandakh]

http://www.bridgeguys.com/Conventions/Rubinsohl.html

 

A brief history included as to why both Rubensohl and Rubinsohl are used.