2D artificial reverse

[Walddk]

Playing a natural system you (dealer) hold

 

♠842

♥AQ3

♦A

♣AKJ1087

 

and the bidding goes

 

1♣ - 1♥

??

 

Awkward, is it not? Too good for a 3♣ rebid, one trump too few to support hearts, and 4♣ as solid clubs with 3-card heart support is not ideal if 3NT is the spot (AQxx, xxxx in the majors). So how do you tackle this hand?

 

I suggest 2♦ as an artificial reverse. It only applies after 1♣ - 1MA. Now 2♦ is ambiguous, 4-way actually.

 

1. Natural reverse with clubs and diamonds.

 

2. A hand too good to rebid 3♣ with 3-card support for responder's major.

 

3. A hand too good to rebid 3♣ without 3-card support for responder's major.

 

4. 18-19 balanced with no stopper in 4th suit.

 

.....

 

Responder proceeds as he would have after a natural 2♦ reverse with one exception: 4th suit asks for clarification. He may choose to bid 4th suit even with four diamonds in order to give opener room to clarify as cheaply as possible.

 

This 2♦ reverse has been on my convention card for about 2 years now, and I have had nothing but excellent results. Give it a try.

 

Roland

 

P.S. If you play this method, 2♦ is obviously alertable.

[Chamaco]

I suggest 2♦ as an artificial reverse. It only applies after 1♣ - 1MA. Now 2♦ is ambiguous, 4-way actually.

This is close to the "Multireverse" used by many in italy.

 

The concept, similar to the Gazzilli concept for 1M opening, is to use the first "reverse" step as an artificial reverse; it also applies to, say 1D-1S-2H (2H = Multireverse), or 1D-1H-2S (2S = multireverse).

 

This frees up higher jumps (2NT and 3-level jumps), to show specific distributional feaures rather than extras in hcp.

 

Something more specific can be found in this thread:

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

 

(scroll down until you find mentioned Multireverse)

[joker_gib]

Roland,

 

I like the concept but could you give us the continuation you use after 4th suit ?

 

1♣ - 1♥

2♦ - 2♠

?

 

1♣ - 1♠

2♦ - 2♥

?

 

Tx in advance,

 

Alain

[Gerben42]

Good idea! In Dutch Doubleton there is a similar construction.

 

Also I use something similar in case of 1♦ - 2♣ not GF - 2♥

[the hog]

A similar concept to that proposed by Roland is part of the Strefa system - to wit:

2D = GF, natural reverse or just long C ). The 2D re bid can be made on a GF hand with excellent C. Responder can relay with 2 of the other Major, or make a descriptive bid.

 

1C 1H

2D

Now

2M/3D = 5+ cards

 

2 other M = relay

Now

2N = C-D reverse, NT-oriented (3m sets suit)

3C = C-D reverse, suit-oriented (3D asks for sht) 3D/3H/S = 6+C, shortness

3N = 6+C, no shortness, 17-19

4C = 6+C, no shortness, 20-22, demands cues

 

2N/3C = no slam

 

3M = 6+ cards, at most 1 loser suit

[Walddk]

Roland,

 

I like the concept but could you give us the continuation you use after 4th suit ?

 

1♣ - 1♥

2♦ - 2♠

?

 

1♣ - 1♠

2♦ - 2♥

?

 

Tx in advance,

 

Alain

Example 1:

2N: Natural, diamond side suit, not 3 hearts.

3♣: Natural, not 3 hearts, no spade stopper.

3♦: Natural, not 3 hearts, no spade stopper.

3♥: 3-card support, strong club suit.

3♠: 18-19 balanced, no spade stopper.

 

Example 2:

2♠: 3-card support, strong club suit.

2N: Natural, diamond side suit, not 3 spades.

3♣: Natural, not 3 spades, no heart stopper.

3♦: Natural, not 3 spades, no heart stopper.

3♥: 18-19 balanced, no heart stopper.

 

I know that there are more sophisticated continuations, but I want to keep it simple. All the above should be pretty easy to remember.

 

If opps double 4th suit things change a little as far as a stopper in 4th suit is concerned. Now Manco (described by me in an earlier post) applies.

 

Roland

[whereagles]

That hand may rebid 3C or 2NT, depending on the person's style. The 2D pseudo-reverse looks like overcooking to me.. but that's just my opinion.

[Chamaco]

That hand may rebid 3C or 2NT, depending on the person's style. The 2D pseudo-reverse looks like overcooking to me.. but that's just my opinion.

Well it does free up many useful bids. :-)

 

For instance, if you decide to include the strong balanced reverse into the multireverse, you free up the 1m-1M-2NT bid as "PseudoJacoby" (or PseudoScanian, or whatever) strong raise, using the same system on you use after 1M-2NT.

 

There are plenty of other sequences that can benefit from the Multireverse.

[Walddk]

That hand may rebid 3C or 2NT, depending on the person's style. The 2D pseudo-reverse looks like overcooking to me.. but that's just my opinion.

3♣ is a serious underbid, and 2NT is probably the worst bid I have seen in about 20 years.

 

Do you think that your partner will bid again over 3♣ with

 

xxx

KJ10xx

xxxx

Q

 

He has a 9 loser hand opposite a non forcing 3♣. Your 3♣ doesn't promise heart support, does it?

 

As always, you are entitled to your opinion, but maybe you could try to be constructive just for once. Please tell me what you lose by adopting 2♦ with a hand like that?

 

Roland

[helene_t]

Without further agreement I would rebid 2NT. Of course 2♦ is better, if you have agreements about the continuation.

[Walddk]

Without further agreement I would rebid 2NT. Of course 2♦ is better, if you have agreements about the continuation.

Excellent, and your naive partner will raise you to 3NT with

 

xx

KJxx

Qxx

Qxxx

 

But maybe you never get a spade lead, or if you do, they always break 4-4 for you I suppose.

 

By the way, would you also rebid 2NT with

 

xx

AQx

Ax

AKJ10xx

 

It's fair enough if you think the continuation is too difficult if you bid 2♦, but it is no doubt a much better bid than any number of NT's and 3♣.

 

Roland

[whereagles]

That hand may rebid 3C or 2NT, depending on the person's style. The 2D pseudo-reverse looks like overcooking to me.. but that's just my opinion.

3♣ is a serious underbid, and 2NT is probably the worst bid I have seen in about 20 years.

Well, bridge isn't an exact science. 3♣ and 2NT are two ways of solving the problem of not having enough bids for all hands.

 

Also, I think a 2NT rebid is completely fine. Add the spade queen to the hand and ask people what they would open. I'm sure at least 25% of the people will open the hand a 20-22 2NT. So without the spade queen I don't see any problem whatsoever in considering the hand a 18-19 balanced and bid it accordingly.

 

Do you think that your partner will bid again over 3♣ with

 

xxx

KJ10xx

xxxx

Q

 

He has a 9 loser hand opposite a non forcing 3♣. Your 3♣ doesn't promise heart support, does it?

A good partner, i.e. someone who can count tricks instead of points, will know to bid on with that. He will bid 3♥, a bid which is forcing in my book. But you can also try 3♦ if you're afraid pard might pass 3♥.

 

As always, you are entitled to your opinion, but maybe you could try to be constructive just for once. Please tell me what you lose by adopting 2♦ with a hand like that?

Well, you lose the natural meaning of 2♦ as reverse. Playing it as artificial means you'd have to put more stuff into your memory for what I judge to be at the very best a marginal gain.

[helene_t]

It's fair enough if you think the continuation is too difficult if you bid 2♦, but it is no doubt a much better bid than any number of NT's and 3♣.

That's exactly what I said, wasn't it? Or do you think 2♦ is the right bid even if it's supposed to be natural? (Note: This latter question is a genuine question, it's not rethoric). Btw, "Jack" systematically bids 2NT with this hand and alerts it as "18+, ballanced or 6+ clubs with 3-card heart support". But that's not my point.

[Walddk]

Also, I think a 2NT rebid is completely fine. Add the spade queen to the hand and ask people what they would open. I'm sure at least 25% of the people will open the hand a 20-22 2NT. So without the spade queen I don't see any problem whatsoever in considering the hand a 18-19 balanced and bid it accordingly.

 

Do you think that your partner will bid again over 3♣ with

 

xxx

KJ10xx

xxxx

Q

 

He has a 9 loser hand opposite a non forcing 3♣. Your 3♣ doesn't promise heart support, does it?

A good partner, i.e. someone who can count tricks instead of points, will know to bid on with that. He will bid 3♥, a bid which is forcing in my book. But you can also try 3♦ if you're afraid pard might pass 3♥.

 

As always, you are entitled to your opinion, but maybe you could try to be constructive just for once. Please tell me what you lose by adopting 2♦ with a hand like that?

Well, you lose the natural meaning of 2♦ as reverse. Playing it as artificial means you'd have to put more stuff into your memory for what I judge to be at the very best a marginal gain.

1. And get to 3NT every time it's wrong (look at my response to helene_t). Have fun.

 

2. Count tricks? Which tricks opposite what could be shortage in hearts, or even a small doubleton?

 

Kx

xx

KQJ

AKxxxx

 

I agree, 3♥ is forcing, and where do we end up in a minute? Right, in a non making game.

 

3. I think you should read my initial post again. You do not lose the natural meaning of 2♦. It's included; strangely enough it is mentioned in the first of the 4 possibilities.

 

Roland

[Walddk]

Or do you think 2♦ is the right bid even if it's supposed to be natural?

Yes, I think 2♦ is the correct bid even if I don't have an agreement. When will partner support diamonds? When he has 4, right? Well, in that case he has 5 hearts, so what's the problem? I will just correct to hearts.

 

Roland

[P_Marlowe]

Hi Roland,

 

another solution for your problem was suggested by Richard Pavlicek.

He suggests to invert the meaning of openers Minor (jump) rebids.

 

i.e.

 

1C - 1H

2C (1) - ...

 

(1) 6 card suit, 16+ HCP, forcing for one round

 

1C - 1H

3C (2) - ...

 

(2) 6 card suit, <15 HCP

 

In some cases this will lead to some awkward rebid problems for

opener, especially if you are playing Walsh response, but thats the

price.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[helene_t]

Good point, Roland (honestly). I've never had the agreement in any partnership that we bid 4-cards-up-the-line but I know it's quite common in Denmark and in the Netherlands.

[whereagles]

Look Roland, I'm not going to argue with you.

 

If you think an artificial 2♦ is really the best thing since sliced bread, go ahead and work it out. Just don't expect to convince many people because natural bidding can put you in the right contract on most cases with little memory effort.

[Walddk]

Look Roland, I'm not going to argue with you.

 

If you think an artificial 2♦ is really the best thing since sliced bread, go ahead and work it out. Just don't expect to convince many people because natural bidding can put you in the right contract on most cases with little memory effort.

I didn't invent this, so I deserve no credit at all. I am not even trying to convince the members that this is a good treatment. As I said in my initial post:

 

"This 2♦ reverse has been on my convention card for about 2 years now, and I have had nothing but excellent results. Give it a try".

 

No one forces you or anyone else to give it a try. However, I think it is worth a mention; otherwise I wouldn't have posted it in the first place.

 

Roland

[mike777]

Playing a natural system you (dealer) hold

 

♠842

♥AQ3

♦A

♣AKJ1087

 

and the bidding goes

 

1♣ - 1♥

??

 

 

 

.....

Typical death hand in 2/1 Walsh, BWS.

Hand type that causes even more problems than in more natural sayc systems.

Solutions generated for over 40 years, non fully satifactory.

 

Ongoing debate, is it better to use science to more fully describe openers hand and paint roadmap for partner and defense or bash into hearts or nt and hope for misdefense when P has unsuitable hand.

 

Hand type that drove some in USA to strong club or those overseas to full relay systems. These are the hand types when we are happy for all the opp who overcall with any 5 card spade suit so we can cue spades on rebid.

 

Roland has had very good results with his patch. For those of us who may respond on vapor at least p will have 5 hearts often. Since the opp are not overcalling spades odds go up p may have more normal 6HCP response so at least the bashers will have some HCP to toy with if we end up in 4-3 heart fit or 3nt with no spade stopper.

[Fluffy]

3♣ is a serious underbid, and 2NT is probably the worst bid I have seen in about 20 years.

The hand you posted is an automatic 2NT rebid.

 

And whatever hand you tell me partner will act wrong after I bid 2NT I can post you another where he raises your 2♦ :-P.

 

Now seriously, my 2NT is overloaded as your 2♦ is, we know partner may be unbalanced in some cases after 2NT, althou it is quite rare when the opening suit is a minor.

[hrothgar]

3♣ is a serious underbid, and 2NT is probably the worst bid I have seen in about 20 years.

The hand you posted is an automatic 2NT rebid.

 

And whatever hand you tell me partner will act wrong after I bid 2NT I can post you another where he raises your 2♦ :-P.

 

Now seriously, my 2NT is overloaded as your 2♦ is, we know partner may be unbalanced in some cases after 2NT, althou it is quite rare when the opening suit is a minor.

1. Your 2NT rebid uses much more bidding space than Roald's 2♦ rebid

 

2. Your 2NT rebid means that you are going to declare a NT contract. Not good if your partner has a positional stopper.

[reisig]

Poor Roland...he seems to be defending this artif reverse all by himself. I've been playing that for many many years...there is really no other "good" solution to many hands. BUT ..what about 1!d followed by 2!h (reverse)?

1!d 1!s

? !s Qxx

!h AKx

!d AKQxxx

!c x

[Kaapo]

This looks a bit like the Perverse Reverse described by Colin Ward in The Three Gadgeteers. :)

[helene_t]

You can also play T-Walsh, of course.

 

If I choose to play a standard system, it's because

1) It's standard

2) It's reasonably natural

3) It's reasonably simple

 

Of course, standard systems can be improved by adding all kind of gadgets. But that would undermine all three advantages. Then I would prefer to reconsider the whole system.