Reversing without extra values

[CamHenry]

Good afternoon all

 

My wife does not like reverses. She has nothing against holding a strong hand; she just forgets that rebidding 2♠ after opening 1♥ is a reverse, for example. We've tried a number of ways to make this stick, and after our last session she flatly insisted that we're going to play that reverses don't show extra values.

 

There are, as I understand it, two main reasons that a reverse usually does show extras: reducing the risk of getting too high on a semi-balanced 12-count facing a minimum response, and describing strong hands more accurately. There's not a lot we can do about the first of these (half the time her reverses don't show any extras anyway, for example), but what about the second?

 

I'm looking for a simple, mostly natural, treatment that enables better handling of strong 2-suiters. We play our 2-level openings (except 2♣) as natural, strong but non-forcing. What would people suggest?

[ahydra]

I've played "no reverses" in the past. To deal with the strong two-suiters we invented a custom-built 2C opener showing one or two suits, which while not completely natural is not hard to learn:

 

2C = strong one- or two-suiter (5-5 or better)

- 2D = relay

- - 2H = hearts or two suits without spades

- - - 2S = relay

- - - - 2NT = minors

- - - - 3m = hearts and that minor

- - - - 3H = single-suited with 6 (or poor 7) hearts

- - 2S = spades with or without a second suit

- - - 2NT = relay

- - - - 3x = spades and that suit

- - - - 3S = single-suited with 6 (or poor 7) spades

- - 2NT = 22-23 BAL (or whatever)

- - 3m = 8PT in minor

- - 3M = good 7+ major

- 2H = negative

 

Responder can also make other bids after 2C-2D-2S, agreeing spades.

 

There's probably a better use for differentiating between 2H->3H and a direct 3H; I'll leave that for Ken or Zelandakh. :)

 

The surrounding system was:

 

jump rebid = 5-4 or 6-4 exactly, good 18-21

2C = as above 18-21

2D = any GF or 24+ BAL

2M = weak

 

I can't immediately come up with a simple but obvious way to rework this to include strong 2M openings - perhaps they could show 6-4 exactly?

 

Not playing reverses of course does carry a minor advantage: any suit bid and rebid by opener promises 6 cards. Combine it with solid openings and a weak NT, and you shouldn't get too high that often (hopefully). But the flexibility of reverses being F1 while not eating too much room is just too much to miss normally (particularly if I could convince my partner to play Ingberman).

 

ahydra

[aguahombre]

Cam: There are things we can do with our structure to adjust/compensate/allow for certain individual quirks we insist upon. There are, however, some things you just cannot fix without going to a whole different approach (i.e. artificial system).

 

With all due respect to your dilemma, reverse rebids by Opener after a 1-level response which do not show extra strength cannot be fixed in a natural environment. Ahydra's fix allows for the strong reverse hands, but the weaker reverses are still not workable because they, by definition, will get us too high.

[Kungsgeten]

You could play some version of Gazzili. This is artificial, but does not need to be too complicated. Here's a suggestion:

 

1H-1S;

1NT = Natural

2C = Artificial. Either 16+ hcp with any distribution (except 2NT) or 6+ hearts

2D = Natural, up to 15 hcp

2H = Artificial. 5+ hearts and 4+ clubs, up to 15 hcp

2S = Normal raise.

2NT = Normal NT jump, denies 3+ spades if holding 5+ hearts (depends on if you open 4 or 5 card majors)

3m = 5+ minor, up to 15 hcp (perhaps 13--15 hcp)

3H = Good heart suit (typically 7 hearts), but not 16+ hcp

3S = Invitational with 4 spades, standard

 

1H-1NT;

2S = Non-forcing reverse

Other = As above

 

1S-1NT;

2C = Artificial. Either 16+ hcp with any distribution (except 2NT) or 6+ spades

2S = Artificial. 5+ spades and 4+ clubs, up to 15 hcp.

Other = Same concept as above

 

The idea is when it goes 1M-1X; opener's rebid of 2C shows either a 6+ opening suit, or a strong hand. If opener rebids his major this shows 5+ cards in the major and 4 clubs.

 

1H-1S; 2C--

2D = Artificial. Game forcing against strong hand (about 8+ hcp)

...2H = 6+ hearts, normal openings strength

......3H = Invitational

...2S = 3 spades, 16+

...3S = 4 spades, 16+

...Other = Natural and strong, game forcing

2H = Weak, suggests playing 2H (opener can bid naturally with the strong hand, but may pass)

3H = Game forcing with 3+ hearts

Other = Weak and short hearts, would not like to play hearts even if opener has 6 of them

 

1H-1NT; 2C-2D; and 1S-1NT; 2C-2D; follows the same principles.

 

This is just a basic outline and you'll have to fill in the rest yourself, it's just a suggestion. There's also a (more common I believe) version where 1M-1X; 2C is either natural or 16+, but I prefer it to be 6+ major or 16+ since it usually makes responder's rebid, when weak, easier.

[kenrexford]

As Devil's Advocate, let me make a pitch for why "reverses show nothing extra" is not necessarily compelled by bridge logic and also suggest a way to handle the "cost" of that approach.

 

If you have an intermediate major-minor hand (the classic reverse scenario) with 4M/5+ minor, one could easily see how opening 2♥ or 2♠ to show these hands probably would be workable (intermediate canapé Miuiderberg?). Forcing the three-level to correct into the longer minor is not all that insane, except for the space lost for exploring other suits. When you instead force essentially the same bid through a two-step process which allows partner to say something first, you gain space for partner to unwind his hand, as well, which is critically helpful. With minor openings being 3+ or often 2+, the "weak reverse" is a sort of way to show an unbalanced intermediate with length in the previously ambiguous minor, with more definition to shape and with a hedge escape bid (playing the Moysian major). This is not insanity and potentially workable.

 

An obvious solution then stands out. With the stronger hands, go directly to a Strong Canapé Muiderberg, of sorts:

 

2♦ = 5+ diamonds, one 4-card major, 16+

 

2M = 4-card major (the one bid), longer clubs, 16+

 

Perhaps this is more of a "Reverse Roman" or "Canapé Roman" for the 2M openings, but the idea is workable, IMO. Not great, but workable.

 

If you want to also be able to handle the clubs-then-diamonds reverse situation, make the 2M more clearly the Strong Canapé Muiderberg (major 4-card plus unknown longer minor, strong) with 2♦ strong (16+) with longer clubs. You could even make 2♦ be strong with either minors-longer-diamonds or majors-longer-hearts.

 

A side benefit to this approach would be to have a quick solution (if the 16+ is unlimited) for the auction where you might open a Strong 2♣, hear something, and then have a major-MINOR canapé. That problem evaporates.

 

In fact, purely because this seems funny and sexy, I really hope someone tries this out.

 

 

 

 

 

[Zelandakh]

I would think the most natural solution is to play a simple strong club system.

[kenrexford]

I would think the most natural solution is to play a simple strong club system.

So mundane!

[paulg]

I think the most natural solution is to play jump reverses as showing extra values. Hopefully she'll realise in time that this is not the ideal cure.

 

I'm not convinced that the artificial solutions proposed are best for someone who forgets that reverses show extra values.

[Kungsgeten]

A less artificial way would be that the 2NT rebid can be unbalanced in these situations, but then you have to remember that.

 

1H-1NT; 2NT = Either strong no trump or extras unbalanced without better bid

 

I guess this would work best if playing a weak no trump opening, because the 2NT bid would be more "in range" perhaps.

[the hog]

I suggest that you couple that approach with a simple convention called "Weasel". It works well both on line and face to face

[blackshoe]

I would think the most natural solution is to play a simple strong club system.

Funny, I was just thinking the same thing. B-)

 

FWIW, I really dislike the statement "we don't play reverses". Yes, you do. You just don't play them the way most people do. Either that or you never bid 1X-1Y-2Z, where Z is lower ranking than Y but higher than X.

[PrecisionL]

I would think the most natural solution is to play a simple strong club system.

 

I agree, then you can reverse if opening 1♦ or 1♥ without overstating you strength.

 

However, playing a Strong Diamond System gives you many more Reversing Schemes after opening 1♣.

[aguahombre]

I agree, then you can reverse if opening 1♦ or 1♥ without overstating you strength.

 

However, playing a Strong Diamond System gives you many more Reversing Schemes after opening 1♣.

Whether it be a strong club system or a strong diamond system, the problem isn't overstating your strength --- the problem is leaving the partnership with nowhere safe to go when we reverse without extra strength.

 

The weak NT inference is of little help either, since the reverses are unbalanced hands.

[Cyberyeti]

Good afternoon all

 

My wife does not like reverses. She has nothing against holding a strong hand; she just forgets that rebidding 2♠ after opening 1♥ is a reverse, for example. We've tried a number of ways to make this stick, and after our last session she flatly insisted that we're going to play that reverses don't show extra values.

 

There are, as I understand it, two main reasons that a reverse usually does show extras: reducing the risk of getting too high on a semi-balanced 12-count facing a minimum response, and describing strong hands more accurately. There's not a lot we can do about the first of these (half the time her reverses don't show any extras anyway, for example), but what about the second?

 

I'm looking for a simple, mostly natural, treatment that enables better handling of strong 2-suiters. We play our 2-level openings (except 2♣) as natural, strong but non-forcing. What would people suggest?

 

Possible solutions

 

Play 2/1 GF which fixes a lot of these.

Widen the range of your 1N rebid and play 2N as GF unbalanced for the really big ones with an artificial 3♣ enquiry (we do this)

Play a lebensohl style bid over the reverse, so you can get out of the auction

[helene_t]

I think the most natural solution is to play jump reverses as showing extra values. Hopefully she'll realise in time that this is not the ideal cure.

 

I'm not convinced that the artificial solutions proposed are best for someone who forgets that reverses show extra values.

Absolutely.

 

The idea of playing 2/1 gf doesn't sound right to me either.

 

Just accept that for the time being, reverses (11-16) and reverse jumps (17+) will lead to some bad results. At some point she will realize that it is better to play reverses as 16+.

 

Playing a strong club system might be a good idea, though. But if your long-term goal is to play Acol correctly, obviously you shouldn't introduce a strong club.

[CamHenry]

Thanks for all the responses!

 

The long-term goal in this partnership is to achieve a reliable 55% in a weak club field, or 50% in a decent club field. She's played one local Swiss pairs, and said that she'd play such things if I need a partner but wouldn't seek them out.

 

I think the approach we'll go for is:

- reverses are not necessarily stronger than minimum opening

- she should try to notice when a reverse is made, though not to worry about it

- jumps are strong

 

We already have the agreement that new suits are forcing (with some exceptions), so at least we're OK there.

 

(I very much like strong minor systems, but my wife does not want to play anything artificial except Stayman, strong 2C opening, and Blackwood. I suspect she'd partner a Portland Club player without too much difficulty).

[paulg]

My wife sounds a stronger player but is equally disinterested in lots of system as we only play a few times a year. We used to just play Stayman and Blackwood, but she does like playing a short 1♣ with 14-16 1NT as it allows her to open a lot more with 11-13 balanced. We put all the balanced hands into 1♣, she likes that, and now play inverted raises in clubs only because that seemed a good idea to her. In fact, like Welland/Auken, she now puts the occasional 5-card major into the balanced 1♣ opener which is always a bit of a shock to me.

 

The other convention she likes is Michaels. The fact was that the strong cue bid rarely came up and it was always disastrous when it did, since we had no idea how to advance. And Michaels comes up a lot more.

 

I still have to play Strong Twos though.

[CamHenry]

I still have to play Strong Twos though.

 

Can you get her to play the strong twos non-forcing? :)

[paulg]

Can you get her to play the strong twos non-forcing? :)

She says no, forcing one round.

 

Oh, she has a strong affection for Smolen too.

[CamHenry]

She says no, forcing one round.

 

Oh, she has a strong affection for Smolen too.

 

The one time I agreed to play a Smolen-like convention, one of us forgot which way round the 5-3 was, and we played 6♠ on our 3-3 fit. It would have stood better chances without the 6-1 trump split!

[Vampyr]

Acol-twos are pretty low frequency; what if you lower the requirements a lot, so that most reversing hands will be opened 2x?

[helene_t]

Most reverse hands are 4M5m which aren't suitable for strong two openings anyway. At least not if the long suit is clubs.

[hrothgar]

Good afternoon all

 

My wife does not like reverses. She has nothing against holding a strong hand; she just forgets that rebidding 2♠ after opening 1♥ is a reverse, for example. We've tried a number of ways to make this stick, and after our last session she flatly insisted that we're going to play that reverses don't show extra values.

 

There are, as I understand it, two main reasons that a reverse usually does show extras: reducing the risk of getting too high on a semi-balanced 12-count facing a minimum response, and describing strong hands more accurately. There's not a lot we can do about the first of these (half the time her reverses don't show any extras anyway, for example), but what about the second?

 

I'm looking for a simple, mostly natural, treatment that enables better handling of strong 2-suiters. We play our 2-level openings (except 2♣) as natural, strong but non-forcing. What would people suggest?

 

No offense, but reverses are pretty simple.

If your partner can't handle this, then I doubt that you're going to find anything simplier that will work

[steve2005]

having some sort of complicated system to compensate when your partner isn't even willing to play reverses show extra strength doesn't sound practical.

how bout this instead with 18+ pts. and reverse type distribution make an unnecessary jump.

maybe not the best solution but at least you can show strong hands naturally.

[CamHenry]

No offense, but reverses are pretty simple.

If your partner can't handle this, then I doubt that you're going to find anything simplier that will work

 

I agree they're not that difficult! I think it's a bit of a blind spot.