Best Reverse Treatment

[microcap]

I am sure this topic has been hashed through, but my partner and I are playing a modified 2/1 with a wide range 13-16 1NT that includes most balanced hands with a 5 card major. We are trying to find the best reverse structure that can accommodate the Bridge World Death Hand and other problem hands, and I hate Ingberman and find it of little utility. What are the thoughts/ideas out there? Thanks! ;)

[inquiry]

If you don't like Ingberman (which i play because easy to remember), then try next free suit as waiting with plus hand unsuited for 2NT. 2NT as natural and non-forcing, and all other simple rebids as negative and natural. The "relay" with positive hands gives your parnter room to show what he has.

 

Dont know this is better than Ingberman, however/

[MickyB]

If you are playing a 13-16 NT, you might want to play a 1NT rebid as 17-19 and a 2NT rebid as the Death Hand (6m3M jump rebid strength). You can probably fit some other hand types in there too. After reverses, Blackout makes sense - weak hands all bid the cheaper of 4SF and 2NT which is lebensohl style, any other rebid by responder (with the possible exception of rebidding his suit) is GF.

[luke warm]

as a matter of interest, why do you not like ingberman? ... i personally think most variants of leb work very well

[mr1303]

Just remind me, what's the bridge world death hand?

[MickyB]

Six of your minor, three of partner's major, strength to jump rebid your minor I believe.

[microcap]

I just don't like losing the natural drop dead 2NT-- I find it a very useful stopping point and much less likely to draw a double and a big penalty. And the BWDH is as described--if you raise partner's suit, he will have a bad 4 carder, if you don't, he will have a good 5 carder LOL Murphy's Law of Bridge! :ph34r:

[inquiry]

Six of your minor, three of partner's major, strength to jump rebid your minor I believe.

More or less very accurate description. It is usually called the Bridge World Hand of Death. I would guess the typical distribution would bd 6331 with lot of points, three card support, and side singleton.

 

Stregnth for 2NT rebid, but side singleton

Stregnth for reverse or jump shift, but no second siut

Stregnth for jump rebid except you could lose yoru fit in your pratner suit, and to be real death hand, your six card suit will only be so-so.

 

So ALL opener's rebids are flawed. Some of us go out of our way to deal with this problem hand is a jump rebid in our own suit.

 

ben

[luke warm]

I just don't like losing the natural drop dead 2NT-- I find it a very useful stopping point and much less likely to draw a double and a big penalty. And the BWDH is as described--if you raise partner's suit, he will have a bad 4 carder, if you don't, he will have a good 5 carder LOL Murphy's Law of Bridge! :)

ok, i understand that... different strokes, i guess.... personally, i'd be very happy if i never ever have to play a 2nt contract

[mikestar]

The BWHD is a special case of the general problem of opener having 3-card support for responder's major in a hand too strong for a single raise. The BWHD is the worst example because it will virtually always be a problem--some of the others may not be, depending on your methods--but all are potential issues. For example, 3-1-5-4 shape and the bidding goes 1D-1S-2C: if partner is minimum and say 5-4-1-3, you will end up in 2C and miss the spade fit, pehaps missing a game if he has a good minimum.

 

In a 2/1 system, perhaps the best answer is some kind or artificial 2C rebid. In a Big Club system where a suit opener can't be balanced, an artificial 1N is quite useful.

[Chamaco]

The BWHD is a special case of the general problem of opener having 3-card support for responder's major in a hand too strong for a single raise. The BWHD is the worst example because it will virtually always be a problem--some of the others may not be, depending on your methods--but all are potential issues.

 

..........

Multireverse does solve this specific problem.

Multireverse uses the first "reverse" step as artificial strong hand , with various hand types.

 

For a short description, see one of post followups at:

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=6187

 

 

However, it is not clear to me why the original poster hates Ingberman.

[mgoetze]

The BWHD is a special case of the general problem of opener having 3-card support for responder's major in a hand too strong for a single raise. The BWHD is the worst example because it will virtually always be a problem--some of the others may not be, depending on your methods--but all are potential issues. For example, 3-1-5-4 shape and the bidding goes 1D-1S-2C: if partner is minimum and say 5-4-1-3, you will end up in 2C and miss the spade fit, pehaps missing a game if he has a good minimum.

 

In a 2/1 system, perhaps the best answer is some kind or artificial 2C rebid. In a Big Club system where a suit opener can't be balanced, an artificial 1N is quite useful.

Not a problem in my Precision system.

 

With 3=3=1=6 I open 2C, specifically denying a 4-card major.

With 2=4=1=6 I open 1D, and our response structure makes finding the 4-card support for responder's major very easy.

With 3=4=0=6 I open 2H, showing this shape or others such as 4=4=1=4, 4=3=1=5...

 

Opener's rebids are always clearly defined and responder always knows whether opener has 3- or 4-card support.

 

Oops, wrong forum. :D

[microcap]

As best I can gather from what my partner argues with me (He likes Ingberman), the idea is to provide the ability to stop at 3C when the auction is 1♦-1♠-2♥ and responder is weak with 4-2-1-6 or something like that. Rebidding responder's major shows 5+ cards and is forcing for one round. Now I don't know about anyone else, but when i have a minimum reverse, my partner is always weak 5-2-2-4 and 2NT is our best stop point (and we won't get doubled when one opponent has a club stack.) Also, since everyone keeps the bidding open these days with less than 5 HCP but a long major, i.e. Qj10xxx-xx-xx-xxx, I am not crazy about making a rebid forcing for one round. In my view, the number of hands that Ingberman loses is far greater than the number of hands that it helps. Just my opinion of course. Reverses are notoriously inaccurate--that is why I started this topic in the first place! :rolleyes: :rolleyes: BTW, I do think the multi-reverse structure is an improvement!