[awm]

Perhaps a good definition:

A reverse is bidding a second suit at a level above the lowest available denomination of the first suit bid.

As for showing extras, this is a different issue. A good general rule (this applies to almost all bidding systems, but there are exceptions of course) is that a reverse shows extras if the auction wasn't already forced to three of the first suit or beyond.

So:

1♦-2♦-2♥: Not a reverse, since the lowest available level of diamonds was 3♦ anyway. However, bidding on over a non-forcing bid when you have a fit shows extras, so if 2♦ was not forcing the 2♥ bid promises extra values. Note that if 2♦ was inverted (a forcing diamond raise), then 2♥ would not necessarily show extra values.

1♦-(2♣)-2♥-2♠: Not a reverse, since 2♠ is not above the lowest available level of diamonds (which is 3♦). The 2♠ call doesn't promise extras unless 2♥ was non-forcing (negative free bids). However, 2♠ should always be forcing since opener is unlimited.

1♥-2♦-2♠: This is a reverse, since 2♠ is above the lowest available level of hearts. If 2♦ was forcing to game, then it's not clear whether 2♠ here shows extras (depends on agreements with partner). However, if 2♦ did not establish a game force, then the auction could have died in 3♦ (or perhaps 2NT) and wasn't forced to 3♥ or beyond, so 2♠ should show extras.

1♥-2♦-3♣: This is a reverse too, since 3♣ is above the lowest available level of hearts. If 2♦ was forcing to game, then 3♣ showing extras is a matter of partnership agreement. If 2♦ wasn't a game force, then 3♣ should be.

[hrothgar]

awm, on Dec 5 2005, 09:41 PM, said:

1♦-2♦-2♥: Not a reverse, since the lowest available level of diamonds was 3♦ anyway. However, bidding on over a non-forcing bid when you have a fit shows extras, so if 2♦ was not forcing the 2♥ bid promises extra values. Note that if 2♦ was inverted (a forcing diamond raise), then 2♥ would not necessarily show extra values.

The sequence

1♦ - 2♦
2♥

is a reverse. You're going to have a lot of difficulty fostering a new definition that doesn't treat this as such.

I'm a simple person. I like simple definitions.

Assume that I have named two suits.
I have made a "reverse" if the following conditions hold true:

1. The second suit that I name out ranks the first suit.
2. The second suit is introduced one level of bidding higher than the first

1♣ - 1♦
1♠

is not a reverse

1♣ - 1♠
2♦ is a reverse

1♠ - 2♦
3♣

is not a "reverse", though it can be described as a "high reverse"