[kenberg]

Scoring: MP

---

This came up in a club game and I am curious as to how most people would bid it. I am sorry but I do not remember the spot cards but in diamonds the spots definitely do not include the 9. No normal human wants to be in 6♦. It turns out that the hearts are 3-2 and the clubs 4-3 so you can make 6♥ via five hearts, one top spade, one spade ruff, three top clubs, one long club, and, if you get it right, one diamond. A bit iffy.

Anyway, we are in 4♥ on an auction beginning 1♣ 1♥ 2♦. I was opener and I planned to bid [2♣ if partner's first bid was 1♠ but given the heart response I figured I would go for it. Now the trick was to stay out of slam and we managed via the confusing auction

1♣ 1♥ 2♦ 2♠ 3♣ 3♥ 4♥ pass. In other words, we were lucky.

If partner had bid 3♦ over 2♥ I would call 3♥ and now I think the fat is in the fire. We agreed afterward that 3♦ was in fact his right bid. Would you be able to stop?


All comments encouraged.

Anyway, all comments will be taken to heart. No doubt at least some of you think I am a queen or so under strength for my 2♦ bid. Of course partner would bid 2♦ had I rebid 2♣ and we reach 4♥ but it seems to me we have a reasonable play for 4♥ even when partner's ace of spades is the deuce, and with that he would pass 2♣. So I am not totally convinced that 2♦ is that much of a stretch. A bit, yes.

[ArtK78]

I agree with you that this is a tough hand to bid, beginning with opener's rebid. After the obvious 1♣ - 1♥, opener has several choices:

2♥ - not everyone's cup of tea to support on 3 cards, but if ever there was a hand to do so, this is it. The only question is whether this is an underbid.

2♦ - right on shape, somewhat aggressive. On high cards alone, this is an underbid. But with the heart fit and the singleton spade the reverse is just about right.

2♣ - an underbid, to be sure. But for someone who is not comfortable in supporting hearts on Kxx and who feels that a reverse on KTxx and "only" 15 HCP, this may be your only option.

More exotic:

3♥ - right on values, but it emphasizes hearts too much with only Kxx in support and a very good club suit and a reasonable diamond suit.

3♣ - again, right on values, but it emphasizes clubs too much at the expense of heart support and a reasonable diamond suit.

My choice is 2♥. I frequently support partner's major suit response to a minor suit opening on 3 cards, and this is a great hand for it. As stated above, it is a bit of an underbid, but not too much. Over 2♥, the auction will end quickly as partner will just bid 4♥ (or, if he is very conservative, he will make a game try and you will, of course, accept).

Over the 2♦ bid that you chose, I would be curious to find out why partner bid 2♠ rather than raise diamonds. If his hand is not a diamond raise, what hand is? As the auction continued, your partner NEVER SUPPORTED DIAMONDS! That seems very odd. After the reverse and raise, and the discovery of the heart fit, it will be difficult to stop short of 6♥.

Over partner's 2♠ bid, you should have bid 3♥, completing the description of your shape. By bidding clubs-diamonds-clubs, you were representing either a 4-6 minor suited hand or, possibly, a powerful 3-7 hand.

[Fluffy]

I agree with most that kenberg said already, I'd also start with 1♣ planning to bid 2♣ but switching to reverse after hearing 1♥. Staying away from slam its tough unless you have a 6 KCBW tool at a low level and find out 2 keycards are missing in time.

[pooltuna]

An ugly hand for South but I would open 1♣ and plan on 3♦/1♦; 2♥/1♥; 1NT/1♠. 3♦/1♦ because this will play fairly well in ♦ and I think a 2♦ call is just too wimpy. 2♥/1♥ but not 3♥ because I feel a ♥ short but want to encourage partner to get to game if he has invitational values. 1NT/1♠ I hate bidding 1NT in this auction with a singleton but the xtra strength and MP value of 1NT cannot be ignored.

As a result I suspect our non-competitive auction might go 1♣-1♥;2♥-3♦; 4♥.

[kenberg]

My apologies, especially to Art. Of course based on (the lack of) what I said, a bid of 3♥ over the 2♠ looks right. However we had agreed that the specific auction 1♣ 1♥ 2♦ 2♠ could be (accent on the could) the start of a sign off. It doesn't promise weakness but it doesn't promise another bid either, so the 3♣ was the "If you want out, this is as good as anything" call. Then, after the 3♥, partner has shown something like what he actually has. Except I would not expect the fourth diamond and we agreed later that he shouldn't have it.

We had also agreed that if he had the weak hand where he wanted out, then he could rebid 2♥, forcing on me but not promising another bid. So after 2♠, the thought is "If he wanted out, he would not have bid 2♠ with five hearts".

Our thinking about reverses is a work in progress.

I apologize for not putting it all out there first. But the thrust of Art's comments were fortunately independent of my gaffe.

[ArtK78]

Ken:

I have to admit that I didn't give much thought to what the 2♠ bid should mean. I play that the cheaper of the fourth suit or 2NT over a reverse creates a non-force on opener's next call. I did not recognize it here because I was deluded by responder's hand, which is clearly a game forcing hand. I would not want to use this gadget since it entices opener to make a non-descriptive call (such as you did when you bid 3♣) if his reverse is not based on a true game-forcing hand.

In this context, a 3♦ follow-up over your 3♣ bid would be non-forcing (in fact, it would ask opener to pass). So I can see why your partner did not bid 3♦ over 3♣. But the auction is getting murkier and murkier, as each successive bid no longer makes much sense in the context of the "get out" 2♠ call.

The immediate raise to 3♦ would have established the game force. That would have been clear. What isn't clear is how you can then stop short of 6♥ or 6♦.

[babalu1997]

kenberg, on Oct 4 2010, 12:27 PM, said:

Our thinking about reverses is a work in progress.

one of the tings that really attracted me to weak nt systems is

1c-1h-2d shows 15-17 5 clubs 4 diamonds denying nt shape, so responder has a nice picture and takes a lot of weight off me

[nigel_k]

After 1♣-1♥-2♦, I would continue with something like 3♦-4♥ then probably 5NT choice of slams and end in 6♥.

I think it is too hard for responder to stop once he hears of reversing values with spade shortage. In order to use RKC for diamonds and pass the 5♥ response, North would have to know that South has three hearts but still have diamonds as the agreed trump suit and I don't see a way to do that.

I prefer a 2♥ raise to 2♦, but I would reverse if hearts were KJx and that is essentially the same problem.

[pooltuna]

babalu1997, on Oct 4 2010, 01:47 PM, said:

kenberg, on Oct 4 2010, 12:27 PM, said:

Our thinking about reverses is a work in progress.

one of the tings that really attracted me to weak nt systems is

1c-1h-2d shows 15-17 5 clubs 4 diamonds denying nt shape, so responder has a nice picture and takes a lot of weight off me

given this auction to show this hand what do you do with

sorry Hanp not really in love with your new hand scheme

---

[ArtK78]

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.

[kayin801]

1♦-1♥
2♣-2♠
3♥-4♥
P

I don't get why 1♣ is a WTP opener, it's a WTP 1♦ opener to me. That having been said, if you're gonna open 1♣, I don't see anything other than a straightforward:

1♣-1♥
2♣-2♦
2♥-4♥
P

Or

1♣-1♥
2♥-3♦
4♦-4♥
P

[kenberg]

babalu1997, on Oct 4 2010, 01:47 PM, said:

kenberg, on Oct 4 2010, 12:27 PM, said:

Our thinking about reverses is a work in progress.

one of the tings that really attracted me to weak nt systems is

1c-1h-2d shows 15-17 5 clubs 4 diamonds denying nt shape, so responder has a nice picture and takes a lot of weight off me

The Tuna, and Art, while I was typing, already got to this but I will take the prerogative of an OP to ask as well: How can you manage with an upper limit of 17?

But even then there are issues of clarity. Change a diamond x to a diamond Q and 6♥ seems to require that there not be an early ruff before you get the lead, and hearts should split 3-2.


My only experience with playing the weak NT was with a partner who understood the 12-14 part but had a creative idea of the word balanced. Despite this, I am sure it has its uses.

[nigel_k]

If anything a weak NT would argue against 2♦, as you can bid 2♥ more happily since partner knows you can't have a weak notrump.

[ONEferBRID]

♠ Axx
♥ AQxxx
♦ Jxxx
♣ x

♠ x
♥ Kxx
♦ KTxx
♣ AKQxx

You may choose the 1C open planning on 1NT rebid if Responder bids 1S,
or 2D "upgraded" reverse when his response is 1H ( since you have K x x ).

Note: for the special 2D Reverse, 2oM! ( 2S! here) is Lebensohl; all other bids are forcing:

1C   -   1H
2D   -   2H ( Peachy: "since the reverse promises another bid, 2H = 5+ is forcing " )

3H   -   ?? Edit ... I'm stuck
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Thx, Ken ... pour me a glass

[kenberg]

ONEfer

It's a nice auction but I am concerned that the opponents will balk at us bidding 3♦ over 3♥. If we get past that one they may still object to 4♥ over 4NT.

I'm drinking malbec, may I pour you a glass?

[ONEferBRID]

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

[babalu1997]

ArtK78, on Oct 4 2010, 02:15 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.

I am not making that one up!!!
For the quote below, please refer to item B-12 from the bridgeworld website.
http://www.bridgeworld.com/default.asp?d=e.../ksupdated.html



1 m - 1 M
2 R (R - suit of reverse)

Forcing, but not necessarily a monster, promises rebid over anything but 3 m. Promises length in m and strength, not length, in reverse suit ®. Could even be doubleton, with 2-1/2 m rebid, or 2-1/2 M with 3 trumps, or game raise in M with singleton in fourth suit

[Zelandakh]

babalu1997, on Oct 5 2010, 12:43 AM, said:

Forcing, but not necessarily a monster, promises rebid over anything but 3 m. Promises length in m and strength, not length, in reverse suit ®. Could even be doubleton, with 2-1/2 m rebid, or 2-1/2 M with 3 trumps, or game raise in M with singleton in fourth suit

First of all, Kaplan-Sheinwold is not definitive of weak NT systems. A more typical weak NT system might be English Acol for example. Secondly, "not necessarily a monster" does not suggest a range of 15-17. In fact it sounds more akin to the typical Acol range of 16+ (but I would have to look at the overall system in more detail to actually know as this decription is nebulous). What is absolutely different about this KS reverse is that it does not show a real suit but rather just values. This would appear to be quite different from a reverse in the normal (and natural) context.

[kenberg]

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

We play the raise of 2♥ to 3♥ as passable and is certainly the call I would make over 2♥. Of course partner would not pass, but it might convince him to stop in 4♥.


The problem is, I think that 3♦ is the right call over 2♥ with responder's hand. After 1♣ 1♥ 2♦ he has a big hand with a diamond fit and it's natural for him to announce it by bidding 3♦. After I then show the heart fit, we're off and running. Going back to 1♣ 1♥ 2♦, responder could bid 2♥ but most of the time ,, when he does, opener will not have three hearts and, if he doesn't, the chance to give an enthusiastic diamond raise will have come and gone. Eg if opener lacks three hearts it could go 1♣ 1♥ 2♦ 2♥ 3♣ and now what? We would play 3♦ as passable and even if you don't it would sound more like "well, this is the best I can do". The immediate 3♦ shows the fit and the strength and doesn't preclude finding the heart fit, it just makes it tough to stop. But after the reverse, stopping is not apt to be much on responder's mind with the hand he holds.

I think we were just lucky. Once I reverse, I think, given the double fit and responder's strength, we end in 6 of something. And 6♥, as the cards lie, can actually be made. Just not what you would call a favorite.

[kenberg]

babalu1997, on Oct 4 2010, 07:43 PM, said:

Forcing, but not necessarily a monster

"Not necessarily a monster " and "Not possibly a monster" are different statements. I see nothing in the reference to suggest a limitation to 17 HCPs.

Anyway, most reverses are unsuitable by shape for any number of NT of any range. An 18 count with 1=4=3=5 shape will start with a club and rebid 2♥ over 1♠ without giving any thought to the NT range, will it not? And the same shape with a 15 count will have a problem whatever NT range they are playing.

Only because of the fit, incuding the king in pard's suit, did I select 2♦ on my 15 count, and even there it gets tricky to keep it all under control.