[Stephen Tu]

 msjennifer, on 2018-May-14, 07:27, said:

Of course it does not need wisdom to construct hypothetical imaginary hands to justify ones bids.It is very easy to say "if partner has this and partner has that then we make" .It is a big relief to see that quite a few have made the same 2D bid.

True. But your statement "game is not possible unless partner can move 2d" was demonstrably false. There are a lot of moderate hands with 5 cd spades and 8/9 hcp or so that make game that cant sensibly move over 2d, because they would get too high opposite the way more common 12/13 6 cd diamond no spade fit hands. Even some hands with bad 6 cd spade suit might not move holding a diamond fit, as you might be correcting a comfortable 9 cd fit into a 6-1 or 6-0 fit.

So 2d absolutely risks missing game.

Now reversing absolutely has the chance of overbidding. But consider that on a lot of hands where you posit that you are overboard in 3d (2d is limit) because partner is weak, the opponents will have half the deck, and would have contested the auction already, or may balance into a making 2h/3c. In those cases you are no longer losing by being in 3d-1 if you weren't going to buy it for 2d.

[sfi]

 marklaf, on 2018-May-14, 00:29, said:

The problem with a reverse is you cannot stop at 3 diamonds---there is no trouble converting heart to spades. If you rebid 3 diamonds over 2nt(NF) then I think 2 hearts is clear. If you do not have that agreement you make your best guess. I would be aggressive at imps but that is just me.

I don't think I have come across anyone who has actually discussed continuations over a reverse that cannot stop in 3D. Responder will have some sort of a weakness bid (most frequently 2NT on this auction), after which the partnership can play 3 of any of the denominations (typically, opener can bid 3D to show a minimum reverse and then a weak responder can attempt to place the contract).

There are various sets of continuations, but all the ones I have seen have the same sort of features.

[PhilG007]

 msjennifer, on 2018-May-14, 07:27, said:

Of course it does not need wisdom to construct hypothetical imaginary hands to justify ones bids.It is very easy to say "if partner has this and partner has that then we make" .It is a big relief to see that quite a few have made the same 2D bid.

There is much to be said for bidding your own hand,not your partner's

[Vampyr]

 steve2005, on 2018-May-13, 11:26, said:

This is the bridge world hand of death.
Either you have a bid that covers this exact hand or whatever you bid could turn out wrong.

You can use a method where the lowest reverse shows:

a) a 6-3 hand of at least invitational strength
b) a 4-card raise too good to raise to game, or
c) a real reverse

[MrAce]

 Vampyr, on 2018-May-14, 09:13, said:

You can use a method where the lowest reverse shows:

a) a 6-3 hand of at least invitational strength
b) a 4-card raise too good to raise to game, or
c) a real reverse

All know my choice is 2♦ as I voted.

I asked to couple of friends, world class players.
I do not post their replies only when they agree with me.
Fwiw, David Gold, who I really like a lot both as person and his bridge skills, said he would reverse 2♥ if he does not have a tool suggested by Vampyr.

[kuhchung]

agree with everything Stephen has said

Jdonn a long time ago posted on the forums (if my memory hasn't failed me) that he would always reverse instead of jump rebidding the diamond suit

[bravejason]

Suppose partner has a strong hand with 3 hearts. With the reverse, you might run into this problem:
1D - 1S
2H - 4NT

Maybe you convert 6H into 6S and luck into an 8 card trump fit. Maybe you are doomed to a seven card trump fit regardless. Maybe it doesn’t matter. Maybe your partner wouldn’t barge into Blackwood like that.

[ahydra]

So risky to lie about a major suit's length. 1D-1S; 2H and partner jumps to 4H with 5-4 majors. You try 4S but partner thinks that's a cue for hearts and you end up in slam going off. If you have agreements that you might bid 3 card majors, OK, but undiscussed this is a big risk. Edit: crossposted with bravejason who makes a similar point

Also can't understand 2D. This hand plays two tricks better than your traditional 2D junk Kx Kxx AJTxxx xx. Partner will pass too often. (Perhaps it depends on whether you have some gadget to show a 18-21 hand e.g. 3NT rebid, if not you may want to make 3x rebids a bit stronger to split opener's range more evenly.)

ahydra

[Stephen Tu]

 ahydra, on 2018-May-14, 12:55, said:

So risky to lie about a major suit's length. 1D-1S; 2H and partner jumps to 4H with 5-4 majors. You try 4S but partner thinks that's a cue for hearts and you end up in slam going off. If you have agreements that you might bid 3 card majors, OK, but undiscussed this is a big risk. Edit: crossposted with bravejason who makes a similar point

Vs. unknowledgeable partner any sequence has risk, of course vs. random BBO partner you have to judge whether partner will be able to handle it and whether you are trying for best result under those circumstances or you are willing to suffer bad result and teach partner something later. And many beginner/ints have trouble on reverse sequences, which is why we have reverse primer sticky thread at the top of this forum. Note mikeh mentioned 3 cd reverse at the end of his article.

But should not be risky with good partner. 3 cd reverse has been commonly discussed strategy in lots of books and articles, BW master solver's club type panels. Good partner will not jump to blackwood, will try set hearts forcing with 3H, and will respect your correction of his proposed final contracts to spades. It is not some obscure strategy that good players should be surprised by.

[cleveritis]

no bid other than 2H is correct... most people play a) that forcing, b) forces 2S with 5... then 2S, 3S and partner can bid 3N with good clubs, and you can bid an easy 4s with AQxx, jxx, xxx, Axx where 3N needs a lot of luck

[miamijd]

 marklaf, on 2018-May-14, 00:29, said:

The problem with a reverse is you cannot stop at 3 diamonds---there is no trouble converting heart to spades. If you rebid 3 diamonds over 2nt(NF) then I think 2 hearts is clear. If you do not have that agreement you make your best guess. I would be aggressive at imps but that is just me.

If you play reverses as forcing to game, you are limiting their use too much. 3D over 2S or 2NT ought to be NF.

[miamijd]

All in all, I think it's very close between 2D and 2H. The time it matters most is when partner has a good 7 to 9 or so. If partner has 4 spades, you are better off bidding 2D, which should make easily enough. If you bid 2H, you will likely go set in 3NT. However, if partner has 5 spades, you are likely better off bidding 2H, because now 4S rates to be a good spot.

BY the way, for those who think 2H is a lie, it's pretty standard expert treatment in the USA that 2H on this auction may or may not show hearts.

In IMPs, I would take the high road with 2H. At MPs, because 4 spades is slightly more likely than 5, I think I would wimp out with 2D.

Cheers,
mike

[eagles123]

 nekthen, on 2018-May-14, 02:47, said:

---

You are all getting too excited. Partner may well have scraped together a response. He can bid again with a decent hand. Here he can pass 2♦ and get an easy top in this room.

this hand is interesting and for what it's worth i'm not sure between 2h and 3d, but think 2d is an underbid.

but this post is just total rubbish that is one of a million hands partner could have ffs

[dsLawsd]

Very good discussion that highlights the need to have an agreement with partner. My first impression was to bid 3 Diamonds, but holding only KQx of hearts could be a problem. Bidding 2 Spades seems like an underbid but partner also knows we are playing IMPs and should make another move with an invitational hand with:
a) 5 spades; b) diamond values or length; or c)a potential double stopper in clubs.
So is your partner an overbidder or underbidder?

3 Diamonds or 2 Hearts aims more for 3 NT it seems when your actual
KTx of spades is not bad even in a Moysian fit.

With a new partner I'll stick to 2 Spades- but in a firm partnership it might depend on what a had for my last meal.

[marklaf]

One comment regarding imps---it is not frequency that determines what you should bid--but expected value--matchpoints is a game of frequency. At imps vul if you are bidding game is 40/60 you should bid it.

[gordontd]

I wonder what would be the rebid for those who have elected to reverse into 2H, if instead the major suits had been the other way around and partner's response had been 1H?

[Tramticket]

 gordontd, on 2018-May-15, 00:41, said:

I wonder what would be the rebid for those who have elected to reverse into 2H, if instead the major suits had been the other way around and partner's response had been 1H?

Good question. I would rebid 2♥ on the original OP hand - but reluctantly because it is a bit under-strength. The problem is more tricky if partner responds 1♥ as you suggest.

I am too strong to raise to 2♥
I can't bid spades for two reasons: (i) because hearts is lower ranking I haven't got the luxury of correcting as spade raise back to hearts and (ii) a 1♥ respnse and a spade raise is consistent with 4-4 in the majors whereas a 1♠ response and a heart raise will show a five-card spade suit.
I am left with a choice between 2♦ and 3♦ when I value it as worth 2½♦. I would probably go low and raise to 2♦.

[Stephen Tu]

If the majors are reversed it is much tougher, without special gadgets. I do like in principle a 2S jump shift semi-artificial (showing values in spades, but not an actual suit) gadget that includes this sort of hand along with others, with a 1S by opener being forcing in principle, though I haven't had much success in finding partners willing to play it.

[sfi]

 gordontd, on 2018-May-15, 00:41, said:

I wonder what would be the rebid for those who have elected to reverse into 2H, if instead the major suits had been the other way around and partner's response had been 1H?

Now the choices are less satisfying, and this is exactly why the Bridge World included these hands in their bidding problems for so many years. My choice would be 3D.

This is one of the benefits of playing something with limited openings. 2NT is no longer needed to show a strong balanced hand, so I frequently use it for these hands.

[steve2005]

We play 2♦ opening as 18-19 balanced. So a natural jump to 2NT is no longer needed.
So 1♦-1♠-2NT shows hand worth a jump to 3♦ also with 3♠