[plaur]

SAYC BBO pickup partner, no agreements

1♣ - 1♠
2♥ - ?

Is 3♥ Gameforce or is it matter of agreement ?

[Fluffy]

It is not game forcing on any system I know about. Except those on wich 1♠ is already GF.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Sorry, I was talking about 2♥, didn't see the post carefully

[Double !]

Time out!

It might not be game forcing (debatable), but did partner not promise at least one more bid when he/she reversed?

[Stephen Tu]

It's a matter of agreement; it's not specified by the SAYC document.

Playing with an advanced/expert partner I would assume that it's game forcing without discussion. It's certainly GF in Bridge World Standard. Weaker hands would temporize first with 2S or 2nt depending on agreements. It's almost universal in published structured reverse agreements for the direct raise to be forcing.

Playing with a random pickup BBO partner of unknown ability, who knows? They might have reversed on a 1435 13 count, with no concept that the reverse ought to show extra values. I would not be surprised to see someone who reversed with this sort of hand to pass 3H.

Whether a reverse promises a rebid is also up to agreements.

[Double !]

if there is an approach out there that doesn't use limited 1-bids and where reverses don't promise one more bid (not necessarily extra values than already shown), I have yet to find it.

[EricK]

Double !, on Jun 8 2005, 04:27 AM, said:

if there is an approach out there that doesn't use limited 1-bids and where reverses don't promise one more bid (not necessarily extra values than already shown), I have yet to find it.

In the original Acol system the reverse isn't even forcing, although it does show extras. So that after eg 1♣ 1♠ 2♥, responder could pass with something like
♠QJxxx ♥xxx ♦QJxx ♣x.

If you are going to play reverses as forcing (as most players do now) then I think you need to have a way for responder to show a lack of interest eg a Lebensohl like structure. Playing that, 3♥ should obviously be GF. With a Pick up partner, who knows what is going on?

Eric

[helene_t]

IMO, this should be gameforce in all systems. Even if you don't have an artificial sign-off (which you probably don't since this is the beginners-intermediate forum), opener's hand will revaluate to a GF when a major suit fit is found.

The issue of whether a reverse promisses a second bid (auto-forcing) is related to weak jump shifts. Some would say that with strong jump shifts, responder must be able to sign-off in 2♠ with 4-6 HCPs.

However, in Hardy's system, a reverse does not promise a second bid allthough he plays weak jump shifts and 3♥ would be GF here. Marty Bergen recommends that reverses promise a second bid even if you play strong jump shifts.

After
1♣-1♠
2♥-? responder must be able to sign-off in 3♣ even if the reverse promises a second bid, though. So 2NT does not promise a diamond stopper, it could also be a hand that wants to sign off in 3♣. With a good pd you can try this even without agreement.

Beginners often reverse on hands that are too weak. At least here in the Netherlands, beginner's textbooks say that a reverse merely shows 16+ HCPs, but you should try to avoid reverses with less than 17 HCPs. With a [2245], [2452] or [2425]-shape and 16 HCPs, 1NT is usually the correct opening and many would even open 1NT with some 5431-shapes with a stiff king or ace.

[bearmum]

helene_t, on Jun 8 2005, 09:28 PM, said:

IMO, this should be gameforce in all systems with unlimited openings (I'm less sure about Precision, but since responder is captain it probably is GF). Even if you don't have an artificial sign-off (which you probably don't since this is the beginners-intermediate forum), opener's hand will revaluate to a GF when a major suit fit is found.

The issue of whether a reverse promisses a second bid (auto-forcing) is related to weak jump shifts. Some would say that with strong jump shifts, responder must be able to sign-off in 2♠ with 4-6 HCPs.

However, in Hardy's system, a reverse does not promise a second bid allthough he plays weak jump shifts and 3♥ would be GF here. Marty Bergen recommends that reverses promise a second bid even if you play strong jump shifts.

After
1♣-1♠
2♥-? responder must be able to sign-off in 3♣ even if the reverse promises a second bid, though. So 2NT does not promise a diamond stopper, it could also be a hand that wants to sign off in 3♣. With a good pd you can try this even without agreement.

Beginners often reverse on hands that are too weak. At least here in the Netherlands, beginner's textbooks say that a reverse merely shows 16+ HCPs, but you should try to avoid reverses with less than 17 HCPs. With a [2245], [2452] or [2425]-shape and 16 HCPs, 1NT is usually the correct opening and many would even open 1NT with some 5431-shapes with a stiff king or ace.

Helene -- in Precision the 1♣ opening does NOT promise clubs (and unless playing ALL relay bids-- which I don't know so can't say what the rest of the bids mean) -- the 1♠ is is 8+ with 5+♠ --- and this establishes a GF sequence, and the 2♥ is not a reverse

AS to the 1♣ 1♠ 2♥ sequence I believe it to be a GF hand as there are many other ways to show a hand with 5♣ and 4♥(presumably) depending on the range of NT you have agreed on

[Walddk]

As I play the reverse concept, opener can pass a preference to the first suit or if responder rebids his own (2♠). Support of opener's second suit is GF and unlimited. Hence, 4♥ would be weaker.

My reverses after 1-o-1 are very sound. 17+ if unbalanced, 18+ if semi-balanced.

Roland

[helene_t]

bearmum, on Jun 8 2005, 10:45 AM, said:

Helene -- in Precision the 1♣ opening does NOT promise clubs

Well, if you play Precision, obviously the discussion applies to
1♦-1♠
2♥ -3♥

[Fluffy]

3♥ to me is one of the strongest bids by responder.

On my agreements I have only 1 bid for part scores after reverse (2NT), rest are GF and looking for slam.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

It is a matter of partnership agreement.

Playing with an expert, standart meaning for the raise
would be game forcing, because the expert will be
playing "moderateur", i.e the 2NT rebid as artificial,
showing at most 7 HCP.

Without this agreement, it is probably nonforcing,
because one could use FSF or bid 4H direct.
A bit ugly in the given sequence, but you have to
live with it.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[PriorKnowledge]

Most play the 3H bid is a game force.
Most commonly played structured reverses: After 1C 1S 2H:
2S = weak, 5+spades. Opener can pass with min reverse
2N = relay to 3C. If opener bids anything other than 3C, it is GF. If opener bids 3C, then:
......Pass, or 3H = weak preference, non-forcing
......3S = 5s, GF
3C = GF preference
3H = GF preference
3S = 6s, GF
There are other bids, but this should suffice for 95% of hands.

[han]

Fluffy, on Jun 8 2005, 06:03 AM, said:

3♥ to me is one of the strongest bids by responder.

On my agreements I have only 1 bid for part scores after reverse (2NT), rest are GF and looking for slam.

I agree with this, ecept that 1C-1S-2H-2S does NOT show extras the way I play (nor denies), it just shows 5+ spades (and 2NT tends to deny 5 spades).

[Fluffy]

I play that squence as 4SF(it is not 4th actually, just a relay) gaining the maximum space Han lol.

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

if there is an approach out there that doesn't use limited 1-bids and where reverses don't promise one more bid (not necessarily extra values than already shown), I have yet to find it

The structure presented in Modern Bridge Conventions by Root & Pavlicek, for example. 1♣-1♠-2♥-2♠ is weak, and non-forcing.

The advantage of course is that you can stop there, which could well be the limit of the hand if you are in the habit of making somewhat light reverses and/or light responses. The disadvantage is that with a stronger hand with 5S you consume more space and often won't have a bid that absolutely guarantees 5S, so the future auction can sometimes become ambiguous.