Raises by opener after a reverse

[smerriman]

Assuming you play Ingberman, after the sequence:

 

1♣ - 1♠ - 2♦ - 2♠

 

what are the standard meanings of 3♠ and 4♠?

 

Have read the stickied primer, and one other thread on reverses, and this came up just a couple of times; a couple of people saying 3♠ should be forcing, and a couple saying it should be nonforcing.

 

Which is more valuable - having 3♠ as a strong bid, allowing room for slam exploration and 4♠ as a signoff; or having 3♠ as an invitation, allowing you to stop short of game? (And when would responder pass?)

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

if you have read the primer, you most likely agree, that 2S should be forcing,

quite common (maybe even expert standard).

In this case 3S has to be nonforcing, at one point in time, one side has to limit

his hand.

 

If 2S is non forcing, than 3S by opener should be forcing, opener showes something

like 5431, and there is not much gain in asking the weak responder, how weak are

you really, but starting a slam exploration auction, or using the the bid as cog

(it allowes responder to bid 3NT, if he has all of his values in openers singlton

suit) will be more rewarding.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

PS: I voted non-forcing, assuming 2S to be forcing.

[Tramticket]

For us 2♠ can be weak and a 3♠ raise is invitational. But I have no strong feelings and can live with either treatment as long as we are agreed.

[smerriman]

Hi,

 

if you have read the primer, you most likely agree, that 2S should be forcing,

quite common (maybe even expert standard).

In this case 3S has to be nonforcing, at one point in time, one side has to limit

his hand.

Yep, agreed 2♠ is forcing. I just can't imagine many hands where I have a 5431, am strong enough to reverse, and still don't want to be in game opposite a hand that was good enough to respond 1♠ in the first place (and has 5 of them). Compared to the number of occasions when I'm interested in slam, but (other than an immediate Blackwood) really just have to jump to 4♠ and let responder be in control of getting there.

 

This may be because people respond 1♠ with sub-minimums more regularly these days. I tend to expect the book definition of a 1♠ response.

[P_Marlowe]

Yep, agreed 2♠ is forcing. I just can't imagine many hands where I have a 5431, am strong enough to reverse, and still don't want to be in game opposite a hand that was good enough to respond 1♠ in the first place (and has 5 of them). Compared to the number of occasions when I'm interested in slam, but (other than an immediate Blackwood) really just have to jump to 4♠ and let responder be in control of getting there.

 

This may be because people respond 1♠ with sub-minimums more regularly these days. I tend to expect the book definition of a 1♠ response.

The alternative explanation: by making the reverse, opener is promising another bid.

It may no be clear, personnally I prefer 2S nonforcing, but I do know, that this is not mainstream, at

least not on BBF.

[Vampyr]

For us 2♠ can be weak and a 3♠ raise is invitational. But I have no strong feelings and can live with either treatment as long as we are agreed.

 

 

The alternative explanation: by making the reverse, opener is promising another bid.

It may no be clear, personnally I prefer 2S nonforcing, but I do know, that this is not mainstream, at

least not on BBF.

 

The OP did start with “Assuming you play Ingberman”.

[P_Marlowe]

The OP did start with “Assuming you play Ingberman”.

Sure, I have read this. What has this to do with my comment?

Ingberman is a way to limit responders hand, espesially when

it comes to raise openers suits.

[smerriman]

The alternative explanation: by making the reverse, opener is promising another bid.

I think you might have misunderstood my question - wasn't asking whether 2♠ should be forcing or not, but whether 4♠ should be weaker than 3♠, since once I discover we have a major fit I'm probably always going to want to play game anyway.

[Stephen Tu]

I think you might have misunderstood my question - wasn't asking whether 2♠ should be forcing or not, but whether 4♠ should be weaker than 3♠, since once I discover we have a major fit I'm probably always going to want to play game anyway.

 

IMO in this age of light opening bids and light responses if you are keeping your reverses so strong that it's a GF opposite a 5 cd spade response, you are under-utilizing the sequence and putting far too wide a range of hands into presumably 1c-1s-2s, and won't be as accurate on the single raise sequence.

 

If responder is strong, the lack of space after the jump to game isn't that bad, because opener's hand is fairly tightly defined in both strength and distribution, you can probably also utilize the jump to 4H for super strong hands a K stronger than min GF .

[smerriman]

IMO in this age of light opening bids and light responses if you are keeping your reverses so strong that it's a GF opposite a 5 cd spade response, you are under-utilizing the sequence and putting far too wide a range of hands into presumably 1c-1s-2s, and won't be as accurate on the single raise sequence.

I would tend to open 1♦ with medium hands not quite strong enough to reverse, to prevent rebid issues after a 1♥ response.

 

But fair point on the jump to game.

[smerriman]

For reference, here is my hand that prompted this discussion.

 

[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?pc=n&s=sa64h4dqj76cakqj6&d=e&a=p1cp1sp2dp2sp&v=n]200|300[/hv]

 

I felt this would be making game opposite most minimums, and bid 4♠ - we ended up too high after partner played me for a stronger hand.

 

I ran a sim afterwards and if North has exactly 6 HCP with at least 5 spades, game is making 51% of the time.

 

If 3♠ is an invite, maybe the real question is, is this under the assumption North should accept with what I would consider 'minimums', due to people often responding much weaker?

 

Or is this just a rare case where you have to risk missing out on a vulnerable game?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I will bid game with the given opener hand, it does not really matter, if 2S is forcing or not.

But, what is wrong with 4H?

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Vampyr]

For reference, here is my hand that prompted this discussion.

 

[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?pc=n&s=sa64h4dqj76cakqj6&d=e&a=p1cp1sp2dp2sp&v=n]200|300[/hv]

 

I felt this would be making game opposite most minimums, and bid 4♠ - we ended up too high after partner played me for a stronger hand.

 

I ran a sim afterwards and if North has exactly 6 HCP with at least 5 spades, game is making 51% of the time.

 

If 3♠ is an invite, maybe the real question is, is this under the assumption North should accept with what I would consider 'minimums', due to people often responding much weaker?

 

Or is this just a rare case where you have to risk missing out on a vulnerable game?

 

It seems to me that a 6-count is rather weak for 2♠.

[gordontd]

It seems to me that a 6-count is rather weak for 2♠.

So what would you suggest instead?

[Vampyr]

So what would you suggest instead?

2♥

[gordontd]

2♥

You are right - I hadn't registered there was an unbid suit cheaper than 2NT in this auction. The tougher problem is when there isn't.

[smerriman]

I will bid game with the given opener hand, it does not really matter, if 2S is forcing or not.

It's getting a bit confusing when you keep bringing up whether 2♠ is forcing or not, as that's not relevant to this thread. Assume 2♠ forcing is a given.

 

You are right - I hadn't registered there was an unbid suit cheaper than 2NT in this auction. The tougher problem is when there isn't.

If 2♠ therefore shows more than a minimum, why is the consensus that 3♠ is nonforcing?

[Vampyr]

It's getting a bit confusing when you keep bringing up whether 2♠ is forcing or not, as that's not relevant to this thread. Assume 2♠ forcing is a given.

 

 

If 2♠ therefore shows more than a minimum, why is the consensus that 3♠ is nonforcing?

 

It depends, really on how you define “more than a minimum”. Apparently, your partner thought that six points was enough. Perhaps “more than a minimum” should be defined as promising game values opposite a minimum reverse? Of course there are various toys, But essentially the problem is that after a reverse you are a little high, and something has to give.

[smerriman]

Oh, partner didn't have 6 points. Was just saying that my hand (a pretty minimum reverse) was good enough to bid game opposite what I would call a minimum. So it seemed odd having to make a non-forcing raise.

 

(Which is why I thought it would make sense for 4♠ to show my hand, and 3♠ to show stronger ones - seems very rare you'd want the option to stop in 3♠.)

[Stephen Tu]

I guess the question is what hand your partner had that got you overboard, and what he thought your minimum for jumping to game was.

 

In any case, I think you can utilize 4h/4s to distinguish between something resembling your hand vs. your hand + a K/ace.

 

I think your hand is a 3s bid personally, partner over 3s should expect ~15+-16/17 hcp imo and go to game with good trumps/not much heart wastage with min hands. You don't really want to be in game opposite something like Qxxxx KJx xxx xx. A 4s bid would be more like QJx x Axxx AKQJx where the points are more definitely working.

[otr52]

I prefer to bid 4 cl after 2 sp - invitation to slam, and if partmner has a week hand, he'll show it With 4 sp

[miamijd]

The answer depends to some extent on how strong your responses are and how strong your reverses are.

 

If you play weakish reverses or sub-minimum responses to 1m, then you probably want 3S an invitational. If you play standard reverses and don't respond to 1m with sub-minimums, then 3S can be a stronger GF than 4S.

 

If opener has 3145 or 3046 with a 17-count (or even a great 16 count) and responder has 5 spades, then unless responder is sub-minimum, you're going to want to bid game. But if responder could have a sub-minimum hand, then you need a 3S invite.

 

Also, if you play weakish reverses (any decent 16 will do), then you probably want 3S as an invite.

 

Personally, I'm down the middle on both resonding with sub-minimums and reverse strength, so I don't have a strong preference either way. As a default, I generally play 3S as a stronger GF than 4S, but if partner wants to play 3S as an invite, that's fine, too; then certainly 4H can be used to show a stronger raise than 4S.

 

Cheers,

Mike

[Gerardo]

What would be 2♥ (4th suit) by responder here? Should be very weak, but does it deny 5+♠?

 

I would take 4♥ here as splinter (must have 3 cards, as you already denied 4), and the strongest bid here.

 

So 3♠ and 4♠ would be NF.

[Left2Right]

Again, I offer my resource to help you practice this convention with your favorite partner and see whether and how effective your understandings are.

Try this constraint.

 

Also, there are two important foundation points to think about before answering the 3♠ continuation question.

 

1. Mr Ingberman himself did not flesh out all the continuations that can happen after opener's reverse. So it's up to us to make ours make sense.

 

2. Consider the following two auctions.

  a) 1♣ – 1♠

     2♦ – 2N*

     3♣ – 3♠ ...

  b) 1♣ – 1♠

     2♦ – 2♠ ...

 

Does it really make sense to end up at a higher level with a worse hand? In auction “a” we woodenly follow the weak relay sequence and end up at the three level. With auction ”b” we can contract our part score for less risk.

 

I would gently suggest the more effective Auction b approach.

♠: x ♥: Kxx ♦: KQJx ♣: AQJxx

paired with

♠: KQJxxx ♥: xx ♦: xx ♣: xxx

Auction B is the pair's last chance to reign in this horse.

 

If one accepts this, then a 3♠ invite makes no sense: the reverser already knows the responder's hand -- a mangy 6 or 7.

 

In addition, the 3♣ acceptance of the relay usually reveals the lesser reverse (16-18). So with a stronger reverse (19-21), opener simply bids game.

 

♠: A x ♥: x ♦: KQJx ♣: AQJxx

paired with

♠: KQJxxx ♥: xx ♦: xx ♣: xxx

 

Cheers.

[apollo1201]

What would be 2♥ (4th suit) by responder here? Should be very weak, but does it deny 5+♠?

 

I would take 4♥ here as splinter (must have 3 cards, as you already denied 4), and the strongest bid here.

 

So 3♠ and 4♠ would be NF.

 

I’d say not necessarily very weak. On the contrary.

 

It is GF (7+ or 9+ depending how high or low you reverse) w/o stop in the 4th suit or stronger than a direct 3NT (13 or more). Denies a natural more descriptive bid like 2S or a good fit for openers’ suits.

 

With 7-9 (and stopper) you bid 2NT then 3, with 10-12 you bid it directly.