[Badmonster]

I read today that the style among experts in France is to bid directly to the three level over an x of a weak two with the weaker hand and use 2nt stop to show the stronger hand. Why doesn't everyone do it this way, as it seems to fall in with the general philosophy of fast arrival?

[MickyB]

How would you show a good hand with ♣?

[Tola18]

One reason may be, if I show with the 2NT-flag I have a positive hand - they can reinforce the preemt.

The adverse, reinforcing preemt against weak hand isnt as bad, as I with a weak hand can pass. In fact, many times WOULD prefer to pass if I could...
But I cant, not with a normal O/T D opposite...


One other reason is, bidding semistrong hands directly, it is a guard against forgetfullness. Pick-up-partners, tired partners, forget alerts...

Late in the evening, when you are tired and no longer remembers the fine points of your fancy conventions, but you have still your bridge-skills.
It is important your fancy conventions have place for natural bids....
Here Im talking from my own experience.

A third reason is expert players often uses some sort of transfer-Leben.


All that said, the French solution is of course entirely feasible. and in fact, introducing Leben to a player who isnt accustomed to it, you of course explain the idea, and after that first thing to do is to ask which variation shehe prefers, feels most convenient with....

[Tola18]

MickyB, on Jul 23 2007, 06:29 PM, said:

How would you show a good hand with ♣?

Right. Exactly. You must bid 4C....

The partner who introduced me into Leben, did talked there is an uncovenient exception, sometimes you must bid 4C...
It must have been this variation (=reversed) and clubs...


Of course, in normal Leben you have a similiar problem although in a lesser degree.

2NT - partner with a really good hand not wishing pass on 3C must bid something else. Say shehe bids 3D. Natural and strong: Yes I understand you are weak, but perhaps anyway?? answerer with zero points can pass and thus the contract is easy and safe.
But if doubler has strong hand with clubs shehe must bid 4C - and this may be too high against complete zero...

[hrothgar]

One possible consideration:

Its more important to right side a NT contract with a strong hand than a weak hand.

[SoTired]

what is it with all this "reversing" common bids? Gaining a minute benefit seems worse than the memory toll. Is this to make sure that you NEVER go a session without having a bidding disaster? Like "short suit game-tries". Kit Woolsey says the best game try is to bid game and try to make it.

[Stephen Tu]

Right siding is somewhat irrelevant in this case as you've already opened 1nt ... that's an issue for other situations.

There is some discussion about bad-good 2nt in Miles' "Competitive Bidding in the 21st century", also look for "weak must speak" articles in old Bridge Worlds as well as rec.games.bridge

Some people, who use "good 2nt", play 3c = strong hand with clubs, 2nt is either bad with clubs or good with other suit.

[hrothgar]

Stephen Tu, on Jul 24 2007, 03:35 AM, said:

Right siding is somewhat irrelevant in this case as you've already opened 1nt ... that's an issue for other situations.

I believe that the original post specified that the auction started

(2X) - X - (P) - ???

[TimG]

SoTired, on Jul 23 2007, 07:30 PM, said:

what is it with all this "reversing" common bids?

This may not actually be a "common" bid. And, if you're going to start playing it, you might as well decide to learn it the way that is best.

I think that with a weak hand you often are just interested in competing to the next level/pushing the opponents up a level. Partner doesn't really need to know which suit you are interested. If the opponents bid to the next level and you are unable to show your suit, you've accomplished your goal anyway.

With a strong hand, it is more likely to be important for partner to know which suit you are interested in.

The Robson-Segal book has a useful section on good/bad 2NT.

[jdonn]

Two reasons I don't like this switch. One is that when you are weak you aren't trying to preempt the other side, you are more likely in fact hoping they DO bid 3 and take you off the hook. The other is you could preempt partner after 2♠ X if you are weak with hearts and he was intending to double then bid diamonds. I don't think rightsiding is a concern, the 'strong' hand is still the weaker of the two hands, and probably has about half his strength in his suit so something like about 4-5 in the other three suits combined.

[helene_t]

Doubler will often have a hand that will accept the invite, so he couldn't bid 3♣ over a possitive 2N. That something else will often be a cue-bid since with some 15-17 points and a good long suit or a stop in opps suit he would probably have made a direct overcall instead of doubling. Now responder has to bid over 3M to show his hand.

[Cascade]

We have played this way for two or three years.

I don't think it is significantly better or worse than standard Lebensohl.

A strong hand doesn't have to bid 2NT and wrong side the NTs. If NTs is a likely contract and we are strong enough to game force we tend to cue-bid instead to deny a stopper. Therefore 2NT often but not always will have a stopper. It will not have a stopper necessarily when it is only invitational to game.

We don't play this way for any special technical reason. It just melds better with our style - lots of free bids with weak hands. And other situations in which we use 2NT as a force.

Over our takeout we play 2NT as forcing - but just for one round - and a suit at the three-level as limited.

Over our 1NT and their interference we play 2NT as a natural invite and negative free-bids. Good hands with a long suit start with a double or a jump.

[nige1]

Badmonster, on Jul 23 2007, 06:17 PM, said:

I read today that the style among experts in France is to bid directly to the three level over an x of a weak two with the weaker hand and use 2nt stop to show the stronger hand. Why doesn't everyone do it this way, as it seems to fall in with the general philosophy of fast arrival?

My team-mates and I have played Reverse Lebensohl for five years. It seems to work OK even when responder has ♣ -- but we still intend to switch to Rubensohl soon.

We use Reverse Lebensohl when opponents overcall our notrump and also when partner doubles a 2-level suit bid.

IMO, these two contexts don't have a lot in common

In either case, however, the weaker hands seem more frequent; and it is easier to compete on weak fitting hands when partner has shown his long suit unambiguously.

[Tola18]

SoTired, on Jul 23 2007, 07:30 PM, said:

Kit Woolsey says the best game try is to bid game and try to make it.

Known as the "Sandra Landy Game try", according to Bols´ Book of bridge tips, ed Sally Brock.