[awm]

Suppose we have the following reverse auction:

1♦ - 1♠ - 2♥ - 2NT!

Let's assume that 2NT is lebensohl/ingberman, normally showing a weak hand and trying to sign off. I believe the standard treatment is that opener bids 3♣ with most hands. This has the obvious advantage that when responder has 4♠ and 5+♣ and a lousy hand, we can reach our potential best contract of 3♣. On the other hand, it also creates issues when opener has one of:

(1) A hand without any real club tolerance (say 2461 or more extreme). Here bidding 3♣ could lead to a silly contract. Of course, one can agree that opener bids 3♦ with such a hand, but then we'd rather want opener's 3♦ to be non-forcing.

(2) A hand with game values that is not suitable to bid 3NT next. If our fix for the first problem was to say that 3♦ is non-forcing (and presumably 3♥/3♠ are natural), then opener has a marked lack of forcing calls available.

It seems like an alternative treatment would be to have the 2NT lebensohl/ingberman call instead ask opener to rebid his first suit. This obviously causes problems if/when our best contract is exactly 3♣. But I suspect this situation is quite uncommon (need responder to have a minimum with long clubs, need opener to have some club tolerance and not GF values). The advantage is that all opener's other rebids besides three of his first suit would be forcing. Thus 1♦-1♠-2♥-2NT-3♣ becomes a sort of "fourth suit forcing to game" showing game force values and looking for the best strain.

Is this idea crazy? Mainstream? Somewhere in between? I'm also curious if anyone has experimented with very different follow-ups to reverses (relays? 2♠ NF?) and has recommendations.

[helene_t]

I think this is crazy if I understand it correctly.

If 2NT is a puppet to 3♦ then we lose a bidding step by not assigning any meaning to 3♣ by opener.

Maybe it's a good idea to sacrifice the option of playing 3♣. In that case I would make opener's 3♣ rebid artificial, for example:
3♣ is either a mimimum reverse with four hearts, or some GF hand.
3♦ shows extras and four hearts.
3♥ is a minimum with 5-6

Or something like that.

[rogerclee]

I have no idea what is mainstream, but I thought about this auction awhile ago and now play:

3C = NF, default bid
3D = NF, 6+♦
3H = Forcing, 6-5
3S = Forcing, could be Hx if not suitable for 3N
3N = to play

[aguahombre]

roger's scheme is good, but every plan has a hole in it. We tried to plug it up somewhat by backing up a bit:

2NT=leb, but will not be looking for a spade fit --weak responder with 5 spades rebids 2S, not 2NT. This can actually be passed if opener is minimum for the reverse with appropriate spade support, or opener can bid 2NT -- also minimum.

Therefore 3S/2NT, on this specific auction is artificial, forcing, and suggests 4-6 in the reds, and all of the other 3-level bids are as Roger says.

[awm]

helene_t, on Feb 21 2010, 03:59 PM, said:

I think this is crazy if I understand it correctly.

If 2NT is a puppet to 3♦ then we lose a bidding step by not assigning any meaning to 3♣ by opener.

The assigned meanings would be:

3♣ = "I have game forcing values, not suited to bidding 3NT now; artificial"
3♦ = "I have a minimum reverse, not forcing"
3♥ = "I have a game-forcing 5-6"
3♠ = "I have a game-forcing 3451"
3NT = "to play, presumably some 1453 with club cards and extras"

You can't really play a true puppet here, because opener might have a 21-count and need to establish a game-force, or opener might have some freak shape and really not want to play in 3♣. The issue is that if both 3♣ and 3♦ show minimums (with and without club tolerance) then opener has trouble creating a force. I'm asking whether it might be worth sacrificing the 3♣ bid showing a minimum with club tolerance and instead using it to show a game force.

rogerclee said:

I have no idea what is mainstream, but I thought about this auction awhile ago and now play:

3C = NF, default bid
3D = NF, 6+ ♦
3H = Forcing, 6-5
3S = Forcing, could be Hx if not suitable for 3N
3N = to play

Sort of funny in that the 2NT bid normally denies a fifth spade, so there's no real chance you'd want to play in 4♠ opposite honor-doubleton. It seems like you're effectively using 3♠ here as an artificial force. There are some hands which don't really fit any call here, like maybe ♠K ♥AKQx ♦AKJxxx ♣xx, but these are infrequent and maybe you'd bid 3♠ on those too.

[jdonn]

I had a huge misunderstanding on this auction to end in 3♣XX with KTxxx opposite a void once, fortunately most suits broke very well so I went down only 1. I don't at all like having two non-forcing bids by opener here. 3♣ NF is standard IMO and what I personally prefer (when responder announces he is weak it's nice to have the most possible final contracts) but it's not bad to have it be 3♦ instead.

[helene_t]

Sorry Adam I obviously read your post somewhat carelessly.

I think it's good idea.

[Fluffy]

I don't have this problem since I never have 5-6 on this bidding and have the 3♥ bid avaible as general game force.

I don't recall having a 2NT ingerman bid more than 4-5 times in my life, but obviously my minimum for 1♠ is about 5 HCP higher than awm's

This is a bit off topic, but I use 2♠ here as 4SF pattern out inquiry.

[peachy]

1D-1S-2H-2NT! [4th suit or 2NT, whichever is cheaper to bid] in my methods shows a weak hand that will Pass opener's next bid or make a correction to final contract.

It is not often that we are playing a partscore in responder's suit, but playing Lebensohl that becomes a possibility when responder's suit was clubs. I don't see the advantage of changing opener's rebid so that he has to bid his first suit instead of 3C because responder can always correct to that if he had a preference.

Still, I'm interested in listening in here. Reverse auctions are often difficult.

[Stephen Tu]

The disadvantage is that you can't play in 3c when responder happens to have long clubs and total misfit for opener's first two suits, and opener happens to have tolerance for clubs.

The advantage is that opener with a huge hand but no club stop doesn't have to bid 3nt and pray responder has a stopper, or bypass it and later find that 3nt was the last making game.

I prefer playing Adam's suggestion, it has similarities to how K-S handles reverse auctions.