[Echognome]

Right. There is certainly another thread entirely on whether reverses in 2/1 should show extra strength. All I'll add here is that if you play limited opening bids and 2/1 (which is very playable), then reverses showing extra strength (i.e. top of range) are quite silly.

[Chamaco]

Echognome, on May 4 2005, 01:10 PM, said:

Right.  There is certainly another thread entirely on whether reverses in 2/1 should show extra strength.  All I'll add here is that if you play limited opening bids and 2/1 (which is very playable), then reverses showing extra strength (i.e. top of range) are quite silly.

I do not agree completely.
Playing precision, I want to open 1 spade at the 1 level with both

a. x-AKxxx-xx- AKxxx

and

b. x-KQxxx-xx- ATxxx
(No, I will not open this hand at the 2-level :-) )

Playing a 2/1 scheme I want to be able to show a distributional reverse with hand 1 and NOT show the ditributional reverse with hand 2.

So, EVEN in a limited-opening context, bidding goes:

hand a.
1S-2D-?
3C = this shows extras

hand b.
1S-2D-?
I cannot bid clubs, it would show a 5-5.5 losers hand.
So I rebid spades.

The point is: EVEN IN A LIMITED OPENING CONTEXT, 1-level openings have a wide range of playing strength and it is important to limit further the hand anyways.

[whereagles]

I kinda agree with Mauro that even limited openers benefit from reverses showing extras.

[Echognome]

I'm not so concerned about the one "true" reverse of 1♥ - 2X - 2♠, what seems to have been the most important is getting across 5-5 hands. So we play 1♠ - 2♦ - 3♣ as showing 5-5 in the blacks with no promise of extra strength. Having to rebid the catch-all seems wasted in my book. Since we have no other reverses (as 1♣, 1♦ are artificial), no need to worry about them.

[Chamaco]

Echognome, on May 4 2005, 02:08 PM, said:

So we play 1♠ - 2♦ - 3♣ as showing 5-5 in the blacks with no promise of extra strength.  Having to rebid the catch-all seems wasted in my book.  Since we have no other reverses (as 1♣, 1♦ are artificial), no need to worry about them.

In my opinion this is sound if you have direct 2-level openings for the 8-11 55+ hands.

This takes care of subminimum 2-suiters, so that when you do show a 55, it is a full opener.

If you do not have 2-suiter weak 2s for 55 8-11, then I prefer to be able to discriminate the strength of the 55 if I decide to open 1M.

[PriorKnowledge]

After a 2/1, whether a reverse shows extra strength is a matter of style and is not required.

I can't believe that 1H 2C 2S MUST show extra strength or else the whole logic of our bidding falls apart, whereas 1S 2C 2H is just as ambiguous but does not cause any problems.

Puuullleeeze

While you are pondering that... how about these auctions for "Reverse not showing extras" folks:

1D 2C 2H - does that show 5d-4h or could it be 4d-4h?
What about
1D 2C 2D with 5d-4h and if responder skips 2H, forget about the heart suit.

For "Reverse showing Extra" folks:
1D 2C - What does opener rebid with AQxx xxx AKxx xx? Forced to skip over 2S and rebid 2N? Or maybe rebid the 4-card diam suit?

[whereagles]

You bid 2NT on that.

(By the way 1D-2C is usually not game-forcing. Only 1M-2x.)

[mike777]

whereagles, on May 4 2005, 10:33 AM, said:

You bid 2NT on that.

(By the way 1D-2C is usually not game-forcing. Only 1M-2x.)

Agree 100% that most players do not play that 100% forcing. I hate that too

btw play your example hand 2 also showing 4spades not moysian but 6 h and 4 s or 5 very good h and 4 weakish spades but agree most players do not.

Play new suit by responder does promise 5-4 100% so with 4-4 got to rebid 2nt, agree many on bbo seem not to play this style. Yes, this means we may play in Moysian if bidding goes:

1D=2C
2NT=3H
4H

This has been very rare and even then the results have been satisfactory.

The main problem of level versus strain in 2/1 remains which is why strong club remains popular at top class. What I do like in 2/1 is the ability to open junky hands and preempt the heck out of opp at one level. I lose some of my constructive bidding. My guess is 2/1 players compensate by just bidding 3nt on every hand.

[Chamaco]

PriorKnowledge, on May 4 2005, 03:14 PM, said:

Quote

After a 2/1, whether a reverse shows extra strength is a matter of style and is not required.

I can't believe that 1H 2C 2S MUST show extra strength or else the whole logic of our bidding falls apart, whereas 1S 2C 2H is just as ambiguous but does not cause any problems.

I agree, it's a style, not gospel. Not necessariliy the best, but it is consistent.
I personally prefer that pener limits his hand if he has minimum values.
The criterion that I use myself to show extras is to allow a "reverse" after a 2/1 with 14 good hcp OR a 6 losers hand.
I do not claim it's the best criterion, but I really like that opener's 2nd bid limits the hand in some way, whichever way you like better. :-)

Quote

While you are pondering that... how about these auctions for "Reverse not showing extras" folks:

1D 2C 2H - does that show 5d-4h or could it be 4d-4h?
What about
1D 2C 2D with 5d-4h and if responder skips 2H, forget about the heart suit.

For "Reverse showing Extra" folks:
1D 2C - What does opener rebid with AQxx xxx AKxx xx? Forced to skip over 2S and rebid 2N? Or maybe rebid the 4-card diam suit?

The situations are quite different:

1) 1M:2x-?
2) 1d:2C-?

1) and 2) are totally different beasts.
Even playing 2/1GF over a major, 1D:2C is inv+ only, so everything changes.

I believe we should make 2 separate threads to discuss "reverse showing extras" after a 2/1 over a major and after 1D:2C :-)

[luke warm]

i disagree with my friend ron on one thing, and it concern's fluffy's example hand... apart from the matter of the reverse showing extra strength, with that hand there should definitely have been a club cue bid instead of a signoff in trumps

i've read both sides of the theory debate on this, and see nothing wrong with either (after all, some damn fine players play both ways)... personally, i'd prefer the reverse not promising extras in a gf hand, mainly because there are plenty of ways to reach slam, if either player is interested... that's one reason i like fred's serious 3nt/cue bidding so much... you're *forced* to cue as a courtesy, unless you yourself are serious

[Chamaco]

luke warm, on May 4 2005, 10:58 PM, said:

personally, i'd prefer the reverse not promising extras in a gf hand, mainly because there are plenty of ways to reach slam, if either player is interested... that's one reason i like fred's serious 3nt/cue bidding so much... you're *forced* to cue as a courtesy, unless you yourself are serious

This works fine in major suit contracts.
The REAL problem arises, especially at MP, when responder and opener have a fit in the MINORS, and responder has no way to know wheter opener has extras without bypassing 3NT.

When opener and responder have a MAJOR fit, serious 3NT works fine, but when the fit is in the minors, it is invaluable to know right from opener's rebid whether he has extras or a crappy 11-13 count.

[Fluffy]

Sadlypokywill never come with the answer of what really hapened :-/

[cf_John0]

Poky, on May 2 2005, 09:03 AM, said:

Expert partner, 2/1 agreed.

Scoring: IMP

1♥ 2♦
2♠ 3♥
4♥ ???

---

What do you expect from your partner?

IMO,some posters are away from the topic.

Between 3♥ and 4♥,there 3S,3NT,4C and 4D could bid.But they are jumped over,i.e. there is no slam try from expert PD.

If there were a slam,then 3♥ should be replaced by 4♦.