Me and my over-excitement

[AL78]

MPs:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sq8632hqt2dqt98c8&n=skhk6dk532cakqt94&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1cp1sp2dp3dp4cp4dp5dppp]266|200[/hv]

 

I recall mentioning to my partner in the not too distant past we should play Lebensohl opposite a reverse, so I thought her direct diamond support showed a better than minimum hand, and me with a four loser and source of tricks in clubs went slam investigating. When she bid 4♦ after my cue, I wanted to sign off in 4NT, but was worried she would interpret that as Blackwood (it shouldn't be), so I settled for 5♦. Once I started cue bidding, we have lost the board, because 3NT only makes nine tricks, and 5♦ is one down.

 

There is a way to use something else to ask for key cards when a minor suit has been agreed, something like minorwood? It wouldn't have mattered here, but is it something like bidding the other minor at the four level or bidding hearts when a minor has been agreed asks for key cards?

[Cyberyeti]

Kickback says 4♥ asks for aces. 3N is lucky to make 9, ace and another spade would appear to establish 5 tricks on most layouts.

[DavidKok]

I think the 4♣ bid is not good, taking away a full level of bidding space. Why not 3♠ (or 3♥)?

[AL78]

I think the 4♣ bid is not good, taking away a full level of bidding space. Why not 3♠ (or 3♥)?

 

I don't have first round control of hearts or spades.

[Cyberyeti]

I don't have first round control of hearts or spades.

 

Very few people play first round controls only in this situation any more. You also need a lot of cards from partner, diamond AK and an ace, bid 3N and let partner move if they want to.

[AL78]

Very few people play first round controls only in this situation any more. You also need a lot of cards from partner, diamond AK and an ace, bid 3N and let partner move if they want to.

 

I need DAQ and another ace (I have the king), yes I admit I went too far.

[FelicityR]

Personally I think the 2♦ reverse bid a bit shabby but then again I am looking at the two hands. Yes, I know it saves space rather than bidding 3♣ or even contemplating 3NT with the North hand as the rebid, but if the hand was ♠K ♥AKQ1094 ♦K532 ♣K6 and the bidding had gone 1♥ - 1♠ I certainly wouldn't be reversing with 3♦. Suit quality is a factor when making bids, and that ♦K532 just looks a trifle anaemic to consider as a forcing second suit bid when you have a suit headed by AKQ1094 as an alternative.

[smerriman]

if the hand was ♠K ♥AKQ1094 ♦K532 ♣K6 and the bidding had gone 1♥ - 1♠ I certainly wouldn't be reversing with 3♦.

But that would be a GF jump shift, not a non-GF reverse, so that's a completely different situation.

[FelicityR]

But that would be a GF jump shift, not a non-GF reverse, so that's a completely different situation.

 

I agree. Reversing at the two level is non-forcing (amended) forcing for one round but not to game, whilst jump shifting 1♥ - 1♠ - 3♦ is a GF, but in the UK and Acol-land it's also called a High Level Reverse (just to confuse things :()

 

The basic thing with the North hand is that as soon as partner responds it's going to be difficult to stop below game. It's hardly a bare minimum.

 

Edit: As per Stephen Tu's comment below. Apologies for the mistake all.

[Stephen Tu]

I agree. Reversing at the two level is non-forcing

I think it's very old fashioned for non-forcing reverses, even in Acol? Surely it's at least F1 (not FG) these days?

 

, whilst jump shifting 1♥ - 1♠ - 3♦ is a GF, but in the UK and Acol-land it's also called a High Level Reverse (just to confuse things :()

 

High reverses are non-jump new suits at 3 level after a 2/1, something like 1h-2d-3c, or 1s-2h-3d. 1h-1s-3d is a jump shift.

 

[AL78]

I think it's very old fashioned for non-forcing reverses, even in Acol? Surely it's at least F1 (not FG) these days?

 

 

 

High reverses are non-jump new suits at 3 level after a 2/1, something like 1h-2d-3c, or 1s-2h-3d. 1h-1s-3d is a jump shift.

 

I've always played a reverse as forcing for one round.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=sq8632hqt2dqt98c8&n=skhk6dk532cakqt94&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1cp1sp2dp3dp4cp4dp5dppp]266|200|AL78 "MPs: I recall mentioning to my partner in the not too distant past we should play Lebensohl opposite a reverse, so I thought her direct diamond support showed a better than minimum hand, and me with a four loser and source of tricks in clubs went slam investigating. When she bid 4♦ after my cue, I wanted to sign off in 4NT, but was worried she would interpret that as Blackwood (it shouldn't be), so I settled for 5♦. Once I started cue bidding, we have lost the board, because 3NT only makes nine tricks, and 5♦ is one down. There is a way to use something else to ask for key cards when a minor suit has been agreed, something like minorwood? It wouldn't have mattered here, but is it something like bidding the other minor at the four level or bidding hearts when a minor has been agreed asks for key cards?

+++++++++++++++++++++

IMO, North-South were unlucky. We play Lebensohl over reverses. IMO North has a reverse but South's 3♦ is a slight overbid. In context, South has useful ♦s and a reasonable hand but the singleton ♣ is a worry, especially as North could have what some call a technical reverse i.e. the ♦s need not be a real suit

e.g. ♠ K x ♥ x ♦ A K x ♣ A K J x x x x

In hindsight, perhaps North should try 3NT over 3♦ :) [/hv]

[Vampyr]

For me, 4♦ is Minorwood, and after that 4NT is a sign-off. (Obviously if responder bids 4NT or above there is no desire to sign off).

[pescetom]

There is a way to use something else to ask for key cards when a minor suit has been agreed, something like minorwood? It wouldn't have mattered here, but is it something like bidding the other minor at the four level or bidding hearts when a minor has been agreed asks for key cards?

We play Crosswood after a minor raise, the keycard asking bid is 4♦ over clubs (as in normal Kickback) but 4♣ over diamonds. Like any Kickback scheme, you need some meta-rules and practice to make it work, but eliminating the use of majors as asking strain has obvious benefits and relatively little cost (inability to ask for Q when trumps are hearts and there are 0/3 keycards, irregular replies when trumps are diamonds).

 

In hindsight, Perhaps North should try 3NT over 3♦ :)

Fully agree.

[Tramticket]

Ieversing at the two level is non-forcing, whilst jump shifting 1♥ - 1♠ - 3♦ is a GF, but in the UK and Acol-land it's also called a High Level Reverse (just to confuse things

 

This is just wrong. A reverse has been a one-round force in Acol since before I was born (a long time ago). A jump shift (e.g. 1H-1S-3D) is and always has been, forcing to game, but is not a reverse. A high reverse occurs after a 2-over-1 response (e.g. 1S-2D-3C) was traditionally a one-round force, but would now be played as game forcing by just about every Acol player - because the standard for a 2-over-1 has risen, even in Acol!

[Tramticket]

There is a lot to be said for the simple auction 1C-1S-3NT, where 3NT is to play based on a long running club suit.

[Cyberyeti]

This is just wrong. A reverse has been a one-round force in Acol since before I was born (a long time ago). A jump shift (e.g. 1H-1S-3D) is and always has been, forcing to game, but is not a reverse. A high reverse occurs after a 2-over-1 response (e.g. 1S-2D-3C) was traditionally a one-round force, but would now be played as game forcing by just about every Acol player - because the standard for a 2-over-1 has risen, even in Acol!

 

Reverses are F1 in mainstream Acol, we might just consider passing one as the REALLY good hand goes via a GF unbalanced 2N rebid, so if I dredged up a response to 1♣ on Jxxx, Jxxxx, QJx, x I might pass 2♦ on the grounds it will probably play better than 1♣.

[AL78]

There is a lot to be said for the simple auction 1C-1S-3NT, where 3NT is to play based on a long running club suit.

 

I never thought of that at the time, though I have heard of it before. There is no other use for 3NT in that situation in our system.

[FelicityR]

I think it's very old fashioned for non-forcing reverses, even in Acol? Surely it's at least F1 (not FG) these days?

 

High reverses are non-jump new suits at 3 level after a 2/1, something like 1h-2d-3c, or 1s-2h-3d. 1h-1s-3d is a jump shift.

 

Yes, I have amended my original post, Stephen. Thank you for pointing that out: I meant to say: Reversing at the two level is forcing for one round but not game.

[barmar]

I agree. Reversing at the two level is non-forcing (amended) forcing for one round but not to game, whilst jump shifting 1♥ - 1♠ - 3♦ is a GF, but in the UK and Acol-land it's also called a High Level Reverse (just to confuse things :()

For most of the players I know, 3♦ would be a splinter in support of spades, not a stronger reverse.

[smerriman]

For most of the players I know, 3♦ would be a splinter in support of spades, not a stronger reverse.

Really? How do you make a forcing rebid as opener then?

[sfi]

Really? How do you make a forcing rebid as opener then?

It's entirely playable and fairly common around here. Opener's simple rebid is forcing for one round (or sometimes "forcing", meaning responder might pass on a subminimum hand with a misfit). You lose the ability to play in 2 of the second suit and have to work out how to show those strong hands later. But you gain free bids for things like mini-splinters. It's not my preferred approach, but it's neither a big winner nor a big loser in my experience.

 

I'm surprised to find it's the default expectation somewhere though.

[smerriman]

I realised afterwards (thought I edited it in, apparently not), barmar was probably referring to 3♦ in the original auction, vs 3♦ in the quoted auction. But interesting to know it's actually played that way too.