[blackshoe]

What's the difference? Is there a difference?

[Mbodell]

From what I've heard explained the difference only occurs if the unbid suit can be mentioned before 2nt. So that would be 1♣-1♠-2♦ and 1♣-1♥-2♦. Over these two auctions the possibly "weak" bid would be 2 of the unbid suit (2♥ and 2♠ respectively) playing Ingberman and all other bids would be game forcing. Playing Lebensohl 2nt would show the possibly "weak" hand and all other bids would be game forcing. All other auctions are the same playing Ingberman or Lebensohl as 2nt is the cheapest bid so becomes the possibly "weak" hand for both.

[ONEferBRID]

Mbodell, on Dec 31 2009, 02:31 AM, said:

From what I've heard explained the difference only occurs if the unbid suit can be mentioned before 2nt.  So that would be 1♣-1♠-2♦ and 1♣-1♥-2♦.  Over these two auctions the possibly "weak" bid would be 2 of the unbid suit (2♥ and 2♠ respectively) playing Ingberman and all other bids would be game forcing.  Playing Lebensohl 2nt would show the possibly "weak" hand and all other bids would be game forcing.  All other auctions are the same playing Ingberman or Lebensohl as 2nt is the cheapest bid so becomes the possibly "weak" hand for both.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the following highlights the differences:

For the special case of the 1C open and 2D reverse:
Lebensohl:
1C - 1M
2D - 2oM = Lebensohl, start of sign-off ( not 2NT; 2NT would be natural, forcing here )-- this is what Mbodell was saying .... but it is part of the Lebensohl convention ( or at least the latest, or most widely accepted, version ).

Also,
1C - 1M
2D - 2M = forcing, 5+ cd suit

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ingberman:
1C - 1M
2D - 2oM = forcing

and
1C - 1M
2D - 2M = 5+cd suit, non-forcing

whereas:
1C - 1M
2D - 2NT! = 4cd M; start of sign-off

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
And the 2 methods are the same in all other reverse cases:
for example:
1m - 1S
2H - 2NT! = 4 cd Sp, weak, start of signoff

or
1m - 1S
2H - 2S = non-forcing, 5+cd suit

[gwnn]

Ingrid Bergman is better because you can sign off lower.

[mikeh]

Mbodell, on Dec 31 2009, 02:31 AM, said:

From what I've heard explained the difference only occurs if the unbid suit can be mentioned before 2nt.  So that would be 1♣-1♠-2♦ and 1♣-1♥-2♦.  Over these two auctions the possibly "weak" bid would be 2 of the unbid suit (2♥ and 2♠ respectively) playing Ingberman and all other bids would be game forcing.  Playing Lebensohl 2nt would show the possibly "weak" hand and all other bids would be game forcing.  All other auctions are the same playing Ingberman or Lebensohl as 2nt is the cheapest bid so becomes the possibly "weak" hand for both.

Close but not quite right, I think. A rebid by responder of his suit is neither gf nor weak: it merely shows extra length and is neutral on values. Thus 1♣ 1♥ 2♦ 2♥ is unlimited, on both ends. This is true in both lebensohl and ingberman, I believe.

[jdonn]

mikeh, on Dec 31 2009, 12:36 PM, said:

Mbodell, on Dec 31 2009, 02:31 AM, said:

From what I've heard explained the difference only occurs if the unbid suit can be mentioned before 2nt.  So that would be 1♣-1♠-2♦ and 1♣-1♥-2♦.  Over these two auctions the possibly "weak" bid would be 2 of the unbid suit (2♥ and 2♠ respectively) playing Ingberman and all other bids would be game forcing.  Playing Lebensohl 2nt would show the possibly "weak" hand and all other bids would be game forcing.  All other auctions are the same playing Ingberman or Lebensohl as 2nt is the cheapest bid so becomes the possibly "weak" hand for both.

Close but not quite right, I think. A rebid by responder of his suit is neither gf nor weak: it merely shows extra length and is neutral on values. Thus 1♣ 1♥ 2♦ 2♥ is unlimited, on both ends. This is true in both lebensohl and ingberman, I believe.

Right I believe this is the difference.

[aguahombre]

I didn't know that. I thought with 17 opposite six we could get out at 2H. but I learn a lot from the fora.

[P_Marlowe]

aguahombre, on Dec 31 2009, 01:26 PM, said:

I didn't know that.  I thought with 17 opposite six we could get out at 2H. but I learn a lot from the fora.

In Europe (at least in certain areas) you can, in North America you cant.

In N/A a reverse promises another bid, in Europe (...) a reverse is just a
one round force.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: I can get out in 2H, ..., where are you from?

[blackshoe]

Hm. I'm not sure I see a consensus here.

[aguahombre]

P_Marlowe, on Dec 31 2009, 04:33 PM, said:

aguahombre, on Dec 31 2009, 01:26 PM, said:

I didn't know that.  I thought with 17 opposite six we could get out at 2H. but I learn a lot from the fora.

In Europe (at least in certain areas) you can, in North America you cant.

In N/A a reverse promises another bid, in Europe (...) a reverse is just a
one round force.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: I can get out in 2H, ..., where are you from?

In ACBL land, reverses are treated with respect --say 17+ --by most decent pairs. but we (pard and I) treat the rebid major by responder as an exception to "reverse promises rebid" with a minimum reverse and a couple trumps. That doesn't mean I think others should bid the way we do. I was just surprised that you don't think that is a common exception --with other ways of showing extra length and more values in responder's hand.

[RMB1]

In England the normal advanced treatment is:
1C-1M-2D-2oM (fourth suit) = Art, weak, F
1m-1S-2H-2NT (no fourth suit) = Art, weak, F
1m-1M-2R (red/reverse) -2M = nat, 5+, F
Other rebids by responder are nat, GF

So we can't stop in 2H but I guess we can sometimes stop in 2S: 1C-1S-2D-2H-2S.

Robin

[ONEferBRID]

For a Summary on Reverse bidding, go to :
" Beginner and Intermediate Bridge Discussion"

then click on the very top thread:

" Pinned: A primer on reverse bidding " by mikeh

It discusses Lebensohl vs Ingberman, etc. at length.

[blackshoe]

<necro>

I have finally figured out, I think, why I was confused about the difference between Ingberman and Lebensohl over reverses. As mikeh said in his "primer on reverses" thread, Ingberman sometimes uses the fourth suit at the two level as the weak relay, instead of 2NT. Lebensohl does not. Yet in his book on Lebensohl, Ron Anderson advocated adding just this "little trick" to Lebensohl, and he never mentions Ingberman at all. As I read Anderson's book long before I ever heard of Ingberman, well, that seems to be why I was confused.

</necro>

[TWO4BRIDGE]

blackshoe, on 2011-July-30, 14:25, said:

<necro>

I have finally figured out, I think, why I was confused about the difference between Ingberman and Lebensohl over reverses. As mikeh said in his "primer on reverses" thread, Ingberman sometimes uses the fourth suit at the two level as the weak relay, instead of 2NT. Lebensohl does not. Yet in his book on Lebensohl, Ron Anderson advocated adding just this "little trick" to Lebensohl, and he never mentions Ingberman at all. As I read Anderson's book long before I ever heard of Ingberman, well, that seems to be why I was confused.

</necro>

It's still confusing because the various sources contradict each other.

Take the 2M rebid ( Hts or Sp ) by Responder after Opener's 2D Reverse:
1C - 1M
2D - 2M

With Ingberman, some sources say 2M is non-forcing ... others say it is forcing.

With Lebensohl, the few sources I've looked at say 2M is forcing.

Mikeh says 2M is forcing ( unlimited ) for both.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

The same goes for the "weak bid " ( start of the sign-off ) ...as you mentioned .
1C - 1M
2D - 2oM! or 2NT!

Some sources say 2oM! as the weak bid is part of Lebensohl.

Others, like mikeh, think the 2oM! weak bid is part of Ingberman.

Go figure.

[campboy]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2011-July-31, 15:53, said:

It's still confusing because the various sources contradict each other.

Take the 2M rebid ( Hts or Sp ) by Responder after Opener's 2D Reverse:
1C - 1M
2D - 2M

With Ingberman, some sources say 2M is non-forcing ... others say it is forcing.

With Lebensohl, the few sources I've looked at say 2M is forcing.

Mikeh says 2M is forcing ( unlimited ) for both.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I don't think that auction is an integral part of either. Lebensohl is just an artificial 2NT on weak hands so that 3-level bids are forcing; Ingberman uses the lower of 4th suit and 2NT instead. I'd say 2M here can be either forcing or NF with either (I vary the meaning depending on whether I'm playing weak jump shifts or not).

[Zelandakh]

Just to confuse matters a little more, the name I have been given for the lower of 4th suit/2NT as the weakness signal is Blackout. Perhaps there are additional differences in which stronger hand types get bundled into this bid, no idea! Does it really matter what we call it?

[campboy]

Zelandakh, on 2011-August-03, 04:09, said:

Just to confuse matters a little more, the name I have been given for the lower of 4th suit/2NT as the weakness signal is Blackout. Perhaps there are additional differences in which stronger hand types get bundled into this bid, no idea! Does it really matter what we call it?

I also first heard of it with that name, in Bird & Bourke's Tournament Acol. I don't know if there's any particular difference.

[lowerline]

blackshoe, on 2009-December-31, 00:41, said:

What's the difference? Is there a difference?

Lebensohl: 2nt forces 3♣. Only if opener wants to gf (18/19+) he bids something else.
Usually it only applies after a reverse that is not yet gf (so not after 2-over-1) and only when responder is unlimited (so not after a 1nt response).

If you notice a difference with Ingberman, you have your answer...

Steven