article on reverse

[steve2005]

there was an article on reverses on thee bbo lonline within the last month.

has anyone seen this posted on the web.

 

what im looking for is the name of the convention. similar to Lebensohl where is used the lower of 4th suit and 2N as the weak bid.

ie 1♣-1♠-2♦- 2♥ is the weak bid

[Vampyr]

there was an article on reverses on thee bbo lonline within the last month.

has anyone seen this posted on the web.

 

what im looking for is the name of the convention. similar to Lebensohl where is used the lower of 4th suit and 2N as the weak bid.

ie 1♣-1♠-2♦- 2♥ is the weak bid

 

As far as I know this is still called Lebensohl.

[PhilKing]

there was an article on reverses on thee bbo lonline within the last month.

has anyone seen this posted on the web.

 

what im looking for is the name of the convention. similar to Lebensohl where is used the lower of 4th suit and 2N as the weak bid.

ie 1♣-1♠-2♦- 2♥ is the weak bid

 

When I was in Australia in 1991, they called it "blackout". It was already common elsewhere, of course, but did not have a name known to me. Google is your friend.

[Mbodell]

I call it (and think it is standard to call it) Imbergman [the cheapest of 4th suit and 2nt is weak].

 

The thread you are looking for is permanently pinned in the intermediate and advance forum from mikeh called a primer on reverses. It is 6 years old but still really good and was in the BBO news a couple of weeks ago. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/18177-a-primer-on-reverse-bidding/ is the link.

[PhilKing]

I call it (and think it is standard to call it) Imbergman [the cheapest of 4th suit and 2nt is weak].

 

The thread you are looking for is permanently pinned in the intermediate and advance forum from mikeh called a primer on reverses. It is 6 years old but still really good and was in the BBO news a couple of weeks ago. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/18177-a-primer-on-reverse-bidding/ is the link.

 

FWIW, I think the convention described there is Blackout even though it is referred to as Ingberman (which was a slight modification to Lebensohl over reverses in that 1d-1s-2h-2n-3c was reverse lebensohl and 3d+ were GF).

 

Blackout introduced lower of 4th suit and 2NT at the two-level, which was new. But if you want a definitive answer, I would ask Tim Bourke, who I am sure will know.

 

Edit: after a quick search, I am attributing it to Pete Pender, though he did not call it "blackout" (June 1988 The Bridge World and I would trust them to know and say if it were previously published or widely known, particularly since Ingberman was a mathematician from New York, so if I am mistaken, blame Jeff Rubens).

[mike777]

there was an article on reverses on thee bbo lonline within the last month.

has anyone seen this posted on the web.

 

what im looking for is the name of the convention. similar to Lebensohl where is used the lower of 4th suit and 2N as the weak bid.

ie 1♣-1♠-2♦- 2♥ is the weak bid

 

 

ya i hate this but seems to be an outgrowth from hating 2nt as the weak bid with only 4s.

 

with that said peter pender and tim are great players.

[mikeh]

ya i hate this but seems to be an outgrowth from hating 2nt as the weak bid with only 4s.

it has nothing to do with hating 2N as the weak bid with only 4♠, whatever that means.

 

One uses the weaker of 4th suit or 2N for at least 2 cogent reasons.

 

One is simple bridge theory: conservation of space. Why take up bidding space needlessly?

 

The other reason is to allow opener, the strong hand, the opportunity, with the right hand type, to bid a natural, descriptive 2N over the 4th suit.

 

If you 'hate it', I suspect it is partly because you don't play it and partly because you don't understand it. It's like people who prefer standard new minor to 2 way new minor: everyone who has said that to me and then played 2 way now prefers 2 way: their dislike was based on inherent conservatism plus ignorance.

[mike777]

I knew i should add this and someone would say what mikeh said.

 

 

prefer to save space with extras not with weak.

 

btw1 2s would be weakish with 5

 

 

btw2 I would expect pard to open mexican 2d with 18-19 often on this auction with no shortness if that adds to the discussion. If not nevermind.

[blackshoe]

FWIW, I think the convention described there is Blackout even though it is referred to as Ingberman (which was a slight modification to Lebensohl over reverses in that 1d-1s-2h-2n-3c was reverse lebensohl and 3d+ were GF).

 

Blackout introduced lower of 4th suit and 2NT at the two-level, which was new. But if you want a definitive answer, I would ask Tim Bourke, who I am sure will know.

 

Edit: after a quick search, I am attributing it to Pete Pender, though he did not call it "blackout" (June 1988 The Bridge World and I would trust them to know and say if it were previously published or widely known, particularly since Ingberman was a mathematician from New York, so if I am mistaken, blame Jeff Rubens).

If I'm not mistaken, Ingberman predates Lebensohl. Never heard of "blackout".

[TWO4BRIDGE]

there was an article on reverses on thee bbo lonline within the last month.

has anyone seen this posted on the web.

 

what im looking for is the name of the convention. similar to Lebensohl where is used the lower of 4th suit and 2N as the weak bid.

ie 1♣-1♠-2♦- 2♥ is the weak bid

Ingberman ... but Lebensohl3 also uses the 4th suit ( 2-of-the-other-Major ) as the weakness bid for the special cases two where 1C is opened and 2D is the reverse ( and these are the only cases ) .

 

See posts 55 and 56 in the primer thread below:

 

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/18177-a-primer-on-reverse-bidding/page__st__40

[PhilKing]

If I'm not mistaken, Ingberman predates Lebensohl. Never heard of "blackout".

 

You may be right about Ingberman predating Lebensohl (or rather Lebensohl being extended to reverse sequences), but that is a different issue. If you can show a reference where Ingberman uses fourth suit at the two-level to show the weak hand, then show me. I do not believe such exists, but I could be wrong.

 

I think there was a recent thread on the distinction between Lebensohl and Ingberman, but I'm too lazy to search for it. To summarize what I believe to be the case:

 

Lebensohl (over reverses) and Ingberman are identical EXCEPT in the case where opener reverses into 2D. In that case, Lebensohl uses the lower of 4th suit/2NT as the artificial weak bid; Ingberman always uses 2NT as the artificial weak bid. Therefore, in Jillybean's original post, North (if 2NT was intended as the artificial weak bid, whether or not 3NT was a planned followup) was playing Ingberman, not Lebensohl.

 

I think it's confusing to use the term "Lebensohl" in this context, because many people assume that it has the same structure as Lebensohl in other auctions, so that all weak responder hands go through 2NT. I'd suggest using Tim Bourke's designation, "Modified Blackout", if I thought anyone would listen.

 

Dave, help me out here. And stick to your guns - call it modified blackout - not Lebensohl. I'm listening.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

You may be right about Ingberman predating Lebensohl (or rather Lebensohl being extended to reverse sequences), but that is a different issue. If you can show a reference where Ingberman uses fourth suit at the two-level to show the weak hand, then show me. I do not believe such exists, but I could be wrong.

 

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/18177-a-primer-on-reverse-bidding/page__st__40

[PhilKing]

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/18177-a-primer-on-reverse-bidding/page__st__40

 

Lol. This is evidence of what, exactly? I may be going out on a limb, but I am guessing you always believe Wiki.

 

You get that I am talking about original sources - Ingberman was already dead when Pender made his modifications.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Help me out here, mikeh... I'm dying .

[blackshoe]

II can never remember exactly what the very subtle differences between Ingberman and the more modern (and, I think, twice modified and now including some of Ingberman's original method) "Lebensohl over reverses" are. So I'll let the rest of you argue over the details, if you like.

[steve2005]

So i gather that Lebensohl now also uses 4th suit as the negative bid if lower than 2N.

this only happens after any 1♣2♦ reverse, 1♣-1NT-2♥ or 1♦-1N-2♥

[PhilKing]

So i gather that Lebensohl now also uses 4th suit as the negative bid if lower than 2N.

this only happens after any 1♣2♦ reverse, 1♣-1NT-2♥ or 1♦-1N-2♥

 

:(

 

Just call it Aardvark, or Modified Aardvark or Wombat or ...

[TWO4BRIDGE]

So i gather that Lebensohl now also uses 4th suit as the negative bid if lower than 2N.

this only happens after any 1♣2♦ reverse, 1♣-1NT-2♥ or 1♦-1N-2♥

[ EDIT: 4th suit negative bid is ] :

only for the TWO 1C ... 2D reverse cases... NOT for any other .

[Zelandakh]

Like Phil, I know this as Blackout. A reasonable alternative is to use transfers.

[steve2005]

click for blackout on wikipedia

 

Responder then rebids as follows:

A rebid of his own suit shows five or more cards in the suit and is forcing for one round, but does not promise any extra strength.

The cheapest bid of the fourth suit is forcing and 2NT shows exactly four cards in his own suit and a minimum hand for his 1-over-1.

The non-cheapest bid of the fourth suit is forcing and 2NT shows exactly four cards in his own suit, forcing to game but not suitable for any higher bid.

A preference back to the opening suit or raising the reverse-suit are both natural, game-forcing with mild slam-try or better.

[steve2005]

Only for the TWO 1C ... 2D reverse cases... NOT for any other .

so what does 1♦-1N-2♥-2♠ mean? i see its not 4th suit, but cant be natural

[TWO4BRIDGE]

so what does 1♦-1N-2♥-2♠ mean? i see its not 4th suit, but cant be natural

It looks like some version of "The Impossible Spade".

It might be covered by Fred G's souped-up version:

 

1D - 1NT

2H - 2S!

2NT! ( asks ) - ??

...................... 3C = good ♣ hand

...................... 3D = strong ♦ raise

 

If Responder had a lesser hand with long clubs, he would bid 3C directly over 2H.

Or if Responder had a lesser hand with Diam support, he would bid 3D directly over 2H .

Hence, there are 2-ways to bid 3C/3D.

 

Then again, there already are 2-ways using Leb3:

1D - 1NT

2H - Leb2NT! ( forces 3C for pass or correct )

3C! - pass/3D to play

 

Soooo, we are back to your good question. What is the best use for 2S ?

Perhaps 2S! should be an artificial weakness bid ... allowing Opener to possibly sign-off in 2NT.

[Zelandakh]

Soooo, we are back to your good question. What is the best use for 2S ?

How about simply 5 clubs? Something like

 

2♠ = 5 clubs

2NT = 6+ clubs

3♣ = 3+ diamonds

3♦ = 3 hearts

3♥ = asks for club stop

3♠ = asks for spade stop

3NT = to play

 

as a transfer scheme seems simple enough. Or, as Lebensohl

 

2♠ = 5 clubs

2NT = sign off in ♣/♦/♥, or asking for club stop

3♣ = 6+ clubs, GF

3♦ = 3+ diamonds, GF

3♥ = 3 hearts, GF

3♠ = asks for spade stop

3NT = to play

 

You could make 2♠ the weakness bid but I do not see the point; if we only have 4 clubs then we have a diamond fit. Anyone have any better ideas for the idle bids than checking for stoppers in the unbid suits?