A strong reverse

[shnk]

[hv=pc=n&n=skhakq54dakjt42c2&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp1sp2hp2np]133|200[/hv]

IMPs, white vs white

 

We play lebensohl after reverses, so partner's 2NT is a relay to 3♣ and shows a desire to stop below game. We haven't discussed this much; I think this is only the 2nd time it has come up.

If I break the relay here, does it show a hand that can't stomach playing 3♣ or does it show a game force?

If it's the former, how do I force game here (if indeed that's what I want)?

[aguahombre]

Our answer here is 3H commits us to game. I think it has enough playing strength to do that.

 

"Relay to clubs", IMO, should not be an accurate description of Lebensohl, however. We do not play that a 3D bid shows extras --- just no interest in being passed at 3C. In addition to showing minimum reverse values, 3C should be willing to play there in case Responder is 4-6 in the blacks with a weak hand.

[aguahombre]

dupe

[Trinidad]

If I break the relay here, does it show a hand that can't stomach playing 3♣ or does it show a game force?

That depends on how you break the relay (and on your agreements).

 

I play that a return to my lower suit (3♦) says that I can't stomach playing 3♣ and doesn't show extra's. It leaves partner room to pick a red suit (or spades). But a bid of 3♥ doesn't leave partner any room and is a "re-reverse": If partner wants to show preference to diamonds he will have to do that at the four level. If that is not game forcing then what is?

 

Rik

[billw55]

I know that two suiters can be awkward after a forcing opening, but I do think this hand is strong enough that it is warranted.

 

As for the question actually asked, I have nothing to add to other replies.

[kenberg]

I might phrase it a little differently than saying that it is a gf. Since partner has not promised any hearts, if he has some then surely he will raise. If he doesn't have hearts, then surely he will not pass.

 

The difference with other comments is that I am not at all sure what happens if over your 3♥ he bids 4♣. I think I would then bid 4♦. Can he pass that? Beats me. It's not what you would call a common auction and I can't say that I have ever discussed it with anyone. On this auction I expect I am losing the first two tricks to black aces, and maybe if I want to play in 5♦ anyway then I should bid 5♦. Partner does not seem to think 4♥ is playable or he would have raised hearts.

 

Anyway, it is inconceivable that he would pass 3♥ but after that, unless he raises hearts or supports diamonds I am not so sure what means what.

 

For all I know, maybe 4♣ over 3♥ is a cue bid supporting hearts. If he has Jxx in hearts and the ace of clubs you have a play for 6[H]. Maybe not a great play, but a play.

 

And I am definitely opening 1♦ rather than 2♣. By the time I bid diamonds once and hearts twice I have been far more descriptive than I could ever hope to be after a 2♣ opening. On shapely hands like this the chaces of 1♦-Pass-Pass-Pass are negligible. Someone always balances or bids the spades or something.

[billw55]

And I am definitely opening 1♦ rather than 2♣. By the time I bid diamonds once and hearts twice I have been far more descriptive than I could ever hope to be after a 2♣ opening. On shapely hands like this the chaces of 1♦-Pass-Pass-Pass are negligible. Someone always balances or bids the spades or something.

Agree, the auction will be difficult and ops may help us by balancing. Still, when a yarborough with six red cards gives good play for game, I would just be uneasy opening 1♦.

[Stephen Tu]

I want to be able to show 5-6 shape and reverse on lesser than this without committing to game, since these hands have so much playing strength opposite a fit, so I play 3H as non-forcing on this sequence, and thus bid 4H on a hand such as this.

[aguahombre]

I want to be able to show 5-6 shape and reverse on lesser than this without committing to game, since these hands have so much playing strength opposite a fit, so I play 3H as non-forcing on this sequence, and thus bid 4H on a hand such as this.

IMHO, that is brutal. Try Opening 1H on those lesser hands to avoid the problem.

[ggwhiz]

IMHO, that is brutal. Try Opening 1H on those lesser hands to avoid the problem.

 

And add the fact that a free run auction is especially unlikely OR it's a misfit.

 

I'm in for 3♥ and if 4♦ happens later I'm out. This is an extra encouraging reverse but not quite a game force but close, opposite weak (we already know that part) soft black cards.

[Stephen Tu]

IMHO, that is brutal. Try Opening 1H on those lesser hands to avoid the problem.

 

I actually want to do 3 ranges of hands with 5-6, reverse and rebid 2h ... 4h, reverse and rebid 3H with less, and then with even less than that open 1H. I feel the ranges get too wide otherwise, if I have to have a GF to reverse then I think medium strength hands don't get adequately described after 1h-1s-2d. And I get a lot more of those medium strength hands than rock crushers like this. Also want to get the long suit in if the opps have spades and not play the wrong strain if sacrificing.

 

When responder has the presumed weak response of 2nt, I don't think that the space afforded by having 3H forcing really leads to significantly more accurate contracts, as you are usually just deciding between 4h & 5d and responder can usually do that over 4H. If he does have several cover cards he can also usually bid the right slam over 4H as well as over 3H.

[shnk]

OK, I learned a few things

When I first read about Ingberman, I understood it that opener's refusal to bid 3♣ after the 2NT weakness bid was game forcing. This is clearly not the case for all of you that responded.

 

I reread mikeh's primer on reverses. It seems that he espouses that not even 3♥ in this specific spot is forcing.

 

I think if I ever get in this spot again, I will bid 4♥. There are only a few minimums where slam is in the picture and I'm not sure going more slowly with 3♥ helps us get there. Still it makes me uncomfortable to use up all that space and jump to 4 on a 5 card suit when partner could have nothing in the way of support. Hopefully p can bid 5♦ if that is the case.

 

I didn't even consider opening 2♣ with this hand.

[Lovera]

I might phrase it a little differently than saying that it is a gf. Since partner has not promised any hearts, if he has some then surely he will raise. If he doesn't have hearts, then surely he will not pass.

 

The difference with other comments is that I am not at all sure what happens if over your 3♥ he bids 4♣. I think I would then bid 4♦. Can he pass that? Beats me. It's not what you would call a common auction and I can't say that I have ever discussed it with anyone. On this auction I expect I am losing the first two tricks to black aces, and maybe if I want to play in 5♦ anyway then I should bid 5♦. Partner does not seem to think 4♥ is playable or he would have raised hearts.

 

Anyway, it is inconceivable that he would pass 3♥ but after that, unless he raises hearts or supports diamonds I am not so sure what means what.

 

For all I know, maybe 4♣ over 3♥ is a cue bid supporting hearts. If he has Jxx in hearts and the ace of clubs you have a play for 6[H]. Maybe not a great play, but a play.

 

And I am definitely opening 1♦ rather than 2♣. By the time I bid diamonds once and hearts twice I have been far more descriptive than I could ever hope to be after a 2♣ opening. On shapely hands like this the chaces of 1♦-Pass-Pass-Pass are negligible. Someone always balances or bids the spades or something.

Why not 2♣ opening ? When if not ? This hand has 3 losers and out of other consideration (see "Counting Q.T. or D.T." in Find my content ) is it just to bid so; then partner is positive ( 1♠ ) and you can apply Reese convention to show a compact suit (diamond here ) bidding it with a jump ( 4 [ Di] ) asking to numbers of Aces ( first step = 0 Ace, second step= 1 Ace - see in Find my content "Bidding approach" to complete use [my post is in italian language ]). It is infact presumible that heart be out of play with this hand [..also ?! ] but, however, is possible to manage too this one.

[Lovera]

OK, I learned a few things

When I first read about Ingberman, I understood it that opener's refusal to bid 3♣ after the 2NT weakness bid was game forcing. This is clearly not the case for all of you that responded.

 

I reread mikeh's primer on reverses. It seems that he espouses that not even 3♥ in this specific spot is forcing.

 

I think if I ever get in this spot again, I will bid 4♥. There are only a few minimums where slam is in the picture and I'm not sure going more slowly with 3♥ helps us get there. Still it makes me uncomfortable to use up all that space and jump to 4 on a 5 card suit when partner could have nothing in the way of support. Hopefully p can bid 5♦ if that is the case.

 

I didn't even consider opening 2♣ with this hand.

About 2♣ bidding see my post 13 here - [With the occasion : in your topic "How to play this" have indicated in North only 12 cards .., bye].

[biggerclub]

I didn't even consider opening 2♣ with this hand.

 

Another argument for 1 forcing ♣.

[whereagles]

Echoing aquahombre. 3♥ here shows a very strong 6-5, which is precisely what you have.

[aguahombre]

I didn't even consider opening 2♣ with this hand.

Excellent. Continue not considering 2♣ opening bids with hands like this.