[Mbodell]

ONEferBRID, on Oct 4 2010, 04:49 PM, said:

Let me try again...

♠ Axx
♥ AQxxx
♦ Jxxx
♣ x

♠ x
♥ Kxx
♦ KTxx
♣ AKQxx

1C   -   1H
2D   -   2H ( 5+ cards, forcing )
3H ( 3 cards ) -  3S ( courtesy cue )
4C  -  4H ( no Diam Ctrl )
all pass

That is how I'd bid opposite myself playing mostly standard methods. I think I'd bid 2♥ to keep the auction low, show the 5th heart, and wait on the diamonds. If it were 5 bad hearts and 4 good diamonds then I might raise the 2♦ to 3, but here "AQ3" versus "J3" suggests heart rebid.

[kenberg]

I hope we can hear more on this sequence. Definitely I like the thought of taking into account not just the lengths but the high card structure. But I still am worried about the follow-up in those large number of cases where opener's major holding is, say, three spades and one heart .

At least as we play it, the rebid of 2♥ shows 5+, is forcing for a round, and could have extra strength but does not promise extra strength. In particular, if partner does not raise hearts after the 2♥ rebid then it does not seem to me that a later 3♦ by responder is forcing. For example, a responder with xx/ AQxxx/ xxxx/ xx would rebid 2♥ over 2♦ and then want to sign off in 3♦ unless opener made a further aggressive move. I'm not saying the actual responder hand, opposite opener's hypothetical 3=1=4=5, wants to be in slam but I think he wants to be in game, whether in diamonds or NT. Among other things, opener will have more than a 15 count this time since that sort of minimum led to a reverse only because of the three card support for the hearts.

So: 1♣ 1♥ 2♦ 2♥ 3♣ ? At this point I think 3♣ is something like "Pard, I was required to bid something and NT doesn't look so great". Opener won't have a monster since 3♣ was passable, but still he has a reverse and we have two aces and a diamond fit, neither of which we have told him about.

As I say, our agreements are a work in progress so I am not really contradicting you. But these are the things running through my mind as I think of what our agreements should be.

[Bbradley62]

ONEferBRID, on Oct 4 2010, 07:49 PM, said:

Let me try again...

♠ Axx
♥ AQxxx
♦ Jxxx
♣ x

♠ x
♥ Kxx
♦ KTxx
♣ AKQxx

1C   -   1H
2D   -   2H ( 5+ cards, forcing )
3H ( 3 cards ) -  3S ( courtesy cue )
4C  -  4H ( no Diam Ctrl )
all pass

How would this auction be different if North held ♦QJxx instead of ♦Jxxx?

[helene_t]

ArtK78, on Oct 4 2010, 08:15 PM, said:

I have played weak no trumps (and mini no trumps) for many years. I did not realize that this had any effect on the required strength for a reverse.

If anything, the reverse might promise a little more playing weak NT since some 16-counts could make an off-shape 1NT rebid to avoid a light reverse.

[NickRW]

helene_t, on Oct 5 2010, 01:32 PM, said:

ArtK78, on Oct 4 2010, 08:15 PM, said:

I have played weak no trumps (and mini no trumps) for many years.  I did not realize that this had any effect on the required strength for a reverse.

If anything, the reverse might promise a little more playing weak NT since some 16-counts could make an off-shape 1NT rebid to avoid a light reverse.

Amongst "natural" systems, the thing which makes the difference in reversing strength is not particularly the NT range. The thing which does affect it is what you play for your 2 level openers. "Standard" (only 2C and 2N for the strong hands) means that a 1x opener has a high ceiling - which in turn means responder is slightly more keen to respond on marginal hands - which in turn means you really need something worthwhile to reverse with.

Alternatively, with some sort of outlet for "strong 2s", you have a slightly lower ceiling for 1x openers, which means responder needs to strain less, which means opener can reverse about a point ligher.

Nick

[pooltuna]

NickRW, on Oct 5 2010, 11:05 AM, said:

helene_t, on Oct 5 2010, 01:32 PM, said:

ArtK78, on Oct 4 2010, 08:15 PM, said:

I have played weak no trumps (and mini no trumps) for many years.  I did not realize that this had any effect on the required strength for a reverse.

If anything, the reverse might promise a little more playing weak NT since some 16-counts could make an off-shape 1NT rebid to avoid a light reverse.

Amongst "natural" systems, the thing which makes the difference in reversing strength is not particularly the NT range. The thing which does affect it is what you play for your 2 level openers. "Standard" (only 2C and 2N for the strong hands) means that a 1x opener has a high ceiling - which in turn means responder is slightly more keen to respond on marginal hands - which in turn means you really need something worthwhile to reverse with.

Alternatively, with some sort of outlet for "strong 2s", you have a slightly lower ceiling for 1x openers, which means responder needs to strain less, which means opener can reverse about a point ligher.

Nick

I hope y'all realize you're making a case for a "light" reverse (still stronger than a minimum opener) and a "heavy" reverse

[ONEferBRID]

Bbradley62, on Oct 5 2010, 08:28 AM, said:

ONEferBRID, on Oct 4 2010, 07:49 PM, said:

Let me try again...

♠ Axx
♥ AQxxx
♦ Jxxx
♣ x

♠ x
♥ Kxx
♦ KTxx
♣ AKQxx

1C    -    1H
2D    -    2H ( 5+ cards, forcing )
3H ( 3 cards ) -  3S ( courtesy cue )
4C  -  4H ( no Diam Ctrl )
all pass

How would this auction be different if North held ♦QJxx instead of ♦Jxxx?

Good question...
♠ Axx
♥ AQxxx
♦ QJxx
♣ x

♠ x
♥ Kxx
♦ KTxx
♣ AKQxx

Perhaps:
1C - 1H
2D - 3D ( 4 cards )
3H ( 3 cards; double fit; most likely 1 3 4 5 shape ) - 3S!
4C! - 4H ( no Diam A or K )
4S! ( 6 Ace RKC ) - ??
.............................. 4NT = 0 or 3
.............................. 5C = 1 or 4
.............................. 5D = 2 and no Q's
.............................. 5H = 2 + 1 Q
.............................. 5S = 2 + both Q's

6D

[jdonn]

I think the question is, how would this auction be different if we couldn't see both hands and thus didn't automatically know whether to rebid hearts or raise diamonds? And that's a tough question.

[spotlight7]

Hi:

KS has some(many?) bids that are not widely used other than KS players.

The KS reverse* 1D-1M-2C is considered 100% forcing.

1m-1M-3m in KS shows something like a standard 2C opening and minor rebid.

1C-1M-2D* is only limited by the lack of a 2C opening.

Look again at B-12, this 1C-1M-2D* auction might contain a "game force"
in the major suit.

A KS game "game force" shows a strong hand, certainly some hands
in the 19-20+ range would be included in 1C-1M-2D* auctions.

Regards,
Robert

[mike777]

ONEferBRID, on Oct 4 2010, 06:49 PM, said:

Let me try again...

♠ Axx
♥ AQxxx
♦ Jxxx
♣ x

♠ x
♥ Kxx
♦ KTxx
♣ AKQxx

1C    -    1H
2D    -    2H ( 5+ cards, forcing )
3H ( 3 cards ) -  3S ( courtesy cue )
4C  -  4H ( no Diam Ctrl )
all pass

As others have said seeing both hands biases the posts.



These 14-16 range hands are just tough...too lite to reverse and pard assumes we have our usual junky 11-13 range....


maybe the bidding might go:

1c=1h
2h=2nt(spades)(2s starts a short suit game try)
3c=4h
p

[aguahombre]

mike777, on Oct 5 2010, 07:59 PM, said:

ONEferBRID, on Oct 4 2010, 06:49 PM, said:

Let me try again...

♠ Axx
♥ AQxxx
♦ Jxxx
♣ x

♠ x
♥ Kxx
♦ KTxx
♣ AKQxx

1C    -    1H
2D    -    2H ( 5+ cards, forcing )
3H ( 3 cards ) -  3S ( courtesy cue )
4C  -  4H ( no Diam Ctrl )
all pass

As others have said seeing both hands biases the posts.



These 14-16 range hands are just tough...too lite to reverse and pard assumes we have our usual junky 11-13 range....


maybe the bidding might go:

1c=1h
2h=2nt(spades)(2s starts a short suit game try)
3c=4h
p

Yep, seeing both hands does bias things

[kenberg]

I chose to show both hands so I take the credit/blame. But I wanted to discuss the general situation of which this is an example. Further, both N and S have choices for their second bids, neither choice being clear cut.

With the hands as they are there is a play for 6H. If you change the ace of spades to a small spade then it's possible the defenders will take the first four tricks (diamond ace, diamond ruff, spade, diamond ruff) but if both red suits are 3-2 then ten tricks are there for the taking (draw trumps, take the clubs pitching two spades, lead a diamond). So if the spade ace is the spade deuce I think a raise of one heart to two hearts may well lead to +170. Otoh, when opener reverses there are dangers as well. If opener has three hearts the rebid of 2♥ works out well, but opener doesn't always, or even usually, have three hearts. If responder bids 2♥ over the reverse and does not get 3♥ in return, I think he has problems. Bidding 3♦ now is surely passable, leaving some not so great choices. Somehow he has to work out whether the hand belongs in some number of diamonds or some number of NT, and there is not much room before he must choose. Opener has bid his hand and will likely accept responder's decision as final.


In brief, opener's rebid of 2♥ may produce (opposite a different N hand) +170, opener's revers may produce a negative score.

I think that many discussions of reverses fall short at just this point. If opener's current hand is deemed to fall short of reverse strength, what does he do? If, based on the heart holding, the hand is deemed adequate for a reverse then there are issues about how to put on the breaks.



My own conclusion is that the reverse is better than the raise to 2♥, just barely, and with responder's now quite impressive hand it is sensible to immediately show the diamond fit with the understanding that hearts are still an option and opener will next show three if he has them. We seldom get hands that are exactly ideal for our methods but I think these are my choices. With these hands, we are apt to get too high. Maybe we get lucky in the play.


There is still another interesting feature. If we have to play this in a slam we want, I think, to play in our 5-3 heart fit rather than our 4-4 diamond fit. This may also be difficult to assess during the auction.

[ONEferBRID]

Quote

As others have said seeing both hands biases the posts.

I've been thinking ( dangerous ) about this hand-- or I should say this hand type -- the 1C >>2D Reverse --
for a few days now.

Responder holds 4 cards Diam and 5 cards Major ( M ):
1C - 1M
2D - ?? The question is: Should Responder support Diam ( 3D ) or show the 5 cards M ( 2M ) ??

Since the odds are that Opener will NOT have 3 card M support, I think Responder should show his Diam support.  If so, then a 3M next by Opener should show the double-fit as well as the helpful "patterning out" shape ( 1 3 4 5 ).

a) We have seen double-fit auctions before such as:
1M - 2m! ( GF )
3m - 3M ( 3 cards M, double-fit )

So a double-fit auction at the 3-level is nothing new...

b )The alternative of Responder bidding 2M ( instead of 3D ) has the deleterious effect of Opener next bidding 3M ( when holding 3 cards ), thus shutting out the 3-level to show Diam support .... so, IMO, a forcing 2M is unwise when holding BOTH Diam support and 5 cards M.

So after:
1C - 1M
2D - 3D
3M - ?? What now with a double-fit ??

I think 4D! by Responder should be RKC ( in a GF auction) and be 6 Ace RKC at that.  
[ 6 Ace is nothing new either ( I've seen Kit Woolsey use it before ), but how many of "us" really use it ?? -- although I would think it should be necessary in a double-fit auction ] .
Responder taking control should be no surprise since he is the only one who knows of the 8 card M fit and will place the final contract in either slam ( 6D or 6H ) or not: 4NT, 5D or 5H :
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Let's take the original hand with the pitiful J x x x Diam support:

♠ Axx
♥ AQxxx
♦ Jxxx
♣ x

♠ x
♥ Kxx
♦ KTxx
♣ AKQxx

1C - 1H
2D - 3D
3H - 4D! ( 6 Ace )
4H! ( 0 or 3 ) - ?? ( thus, 1 key missing-- either the dA, dK or cA )

I think the final decision rests with the dQ .
As with other RKC auctions, asking for a trump Q is NOT a grand slam try, and stopping at the 5-level is not unheard of when the Q is missing.

................... - 4S! ( next, non-sign off step = Q's-ask )
??
4NT = 1st step, neither ♦ or ♥ Q
5C = 2nd step, 1 Q
5D = 3rd step = both Q's

After NOT finding the dQ, Responder bails out in 5H .

[mike777]

Again for me these 14-16 range hands with shortness are tough.
Note if the auction had started:
1c=1s
then I would rebid 2c!

For me this is not worth a reverse so I dont have this issue on this hand.

But if we assume I do have a real reverse....then I must decide do I rebid 2s art/gf or 3d nat/gf.....?

so:


1c=1h
2d=2s!(2h would be much weaker with 5+h) or 3d?

my guess is I might just rebid 3d to make the auction easier.

----------------

make the responder hand a bit weaker and I would have an easy 2h rebid. (weakish 5+h, 1RF/does not promise a rebid by responder)

[Zelandakh]

Don, if Responder has 4-4 in the red suits, how do they ask for keycards in only diamonds? The problem is that Opener does not know of the double fit at this stage so using 6KCB for diamonds does not seem to be right to me. It seems more logical to use RKCB for hearts as 6KCB (presumably 4S or 4NT). Perversely this might be an argument for rebidding 2H since then the auction 1C - 1H - 2D - 2H - 3H - 4D might be used as 6KCB. However this is probably better left as a cue. Following this logic the auction in your suggested style might be
1C - 1H - 2D - 3D - 3H - 4S - 5C - 5D - 5H - P
The trouble is that if you play 5D as a sign-off then you cannot ask for the queens without getting too high. And if you play normal 1430 rather than Kickback then the situation is even worse.

[ONEferBRID]

Zelandakh:

I think the minor suit as RKC is preferable.... and having it as 6 Ace should not hurt the replies. The "asker" places the final contract.

[ I'm not saying there can't be problems ] .

You are right that Opener does not know of the exact Major suit fit, but the knowledge of the Major suit honor(s) may well be important to Responder-- even if there is only a 4-3 fit .

The "lower" suit RKC makes it easier for a possible 2nd ask... and perhaps is the only way for a "reasonable" 2nd ask.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

1C - 1H
2D - 3D (1)
3H (2) - 4NT (3)
5H (4) - Pass (5)

(1) game forcing
(2) cue, values, could be Hx, responder knowes,
that there is at most one spade looser
(3) RKCB for diamons, it would be a hand for 4D
as KC ask
(4) 2KC without Queen
(5) I am not sure, I will find this at the table, the
alternative maybe 5NT to play or 6D, which will
be 50% at best.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[kenberg]

Marlowe asked how many of us play six card rkc in double fit auctions and I own up to having never done so. I have (not often) played 4♦ as RKC in strong auctions with a diamond fit and this would save our butts here. After finding we are off the queen and a key we get out at the five level in something. At imps, diamonds would be a reasonable choice. At any rate, we get out short of the six level. Declarer, whether N or S, will be very happy to see dummy's heart honor(s).

But S has reversed and N has responded positively with 3♦ so someone is supposed to have something.

[Fluffy]

kayin801, on Oct 4 2010, 07:33 PM, said:

I don't get why 1♣ is a WTP opener, it's a WTP 1♦ opener to me.

I open 1♦ with 4-5 quite a lot, but with such a suit disparity I can't see any problem with rebidding my clubs. If you open this 1♦ you have a serious judgement problem IMO.

[kenberg]

Kayin, I overlooked your earlier response. If open a minor and plan to not reverse over a 1♥ response then I definitely will be raising 1♥ to 2♥. When to raise on a three card holding is debatable but Kzz with a stiff spade qualifies with room to spare as I see it.

As to which minor: Different strokes for different folks. If I open a diamond and rebid two clubs, my partners are fairly safe in playing me for five diamonds and four clubs. With 4-4 in the minors I generally open 1♦ and sometimes the hand is just too wrong to rebid 1NT, so 4-4 is possible but unlikely. Holding five clubs and four diamonds I virtually always start with a club. There are hands for which this is uncomfortable, I know, no need to provide examples, but I have tried various approaches over the years and I have come to think of this one as the least likely to cause regret. I have a partner who opens his 4-4 hands with a club. He says it's better. I think Frank Stewart agrees with this. With respect to FS, I don't. Bid the long one, with equal bid the Ds is my approach.