[dickiegera]

WE play lebensohl and 2NT asks partner to bid 3C.

However i believe my first obligation is to show my 5 card spade suit
no matter what.


Opinions Thank you

---

[mikeh]

dickiegera, on 2021-September-22, 12:48, said:

WE play lebensohl and 2NT asks partner to bid 3C.

However i believe my first obligation is to show my 5 card spade suit
no matter what.


Opinions Thank you

---

Correct, at least as I’ve always played it

[helene_t]

That is maybe a good idea, but it requires some discussion: How does opener react after such a forcing-for-one-round 2♠ bid? 3♦ as a generic force and everything else nonforcing might work well when we belong in a partscore, but otherwise not so great. Maybe 2NT from opener should now be Lebensohl?

[Winstonm]

dickiegera, on 2021-September-22, 12:48, said:

WE play lebensohl and 2NT asks partner to bid 3C.

However i believe my first obligation is to show my 5 card spade suit
no matter what.


Opinions Thank you

---

No matter how you play it, what else would you bid with that hand? The question is what do you bid with a 5-card major and a fit with opener’s suit?

[smerriman]

If you don't bid 2♠ now, it's impossible for you to find game in spades when opener is a minimum with 3 card support. (If they have extra values they could bid 3♠ next time over 2nt to show a fragment, but you want to be in game both ways).

[smerriman]

helene_t, on 2021-September-22, 12:58, said:

That is maybe a good idea, but it requires some discussion: How does opener react after such a forcing-for-one-round 2♠ bid? 3♦ as a generic force and everything else nonforcing might work well when we belong in a partscore, but otherwise not so great. Maybe 2NT from opener should now be Lebensohl?

From mike's 14-year-old-but-still-relevant primer:

Quote

Opener can complete the description of his hand by, for example, rebidding 2N with 5431's short ♠s or 5422 with a good doubleton (AQ is an example) or rebidding a 6 card minor or 5 card major or the 4th suit to create yet another force. Of course, opener can also raise ♠s or bid 3N if certain that that is the right bid: x AJxx AKQJxx AQ.... I'd open that hand 1♦, rebid 2♥ and then, over 2♠, bid 3N... no guarantees but I'm not playing below game even opposite the types of hands I respond on.

[Winstonm]

smerriman, on 2021-September-22, 18:10, said:

If you don't bid 2♠ now, it's impossible for you to find game in spades when opener is a minimum with 3 card support. (If they have extra values they could bid 3♠ next time over 2nt to show a fragment, but you want to be in game both ways).

Seems to me this is a non-issue when if you have enough to be in game with a fit. The question to me is this: why am I rebidding the major? Why would I rebid the major with a weak hand and a fit for partner?

A few questions I have assuming the auction is 1C-1H-2D-?

1. What is opener supposed to do with decent 2-card support for the major and a minimum reverse:
xx, Kx, AQ10x, AKJ10x?
2. Does responder rebid the major with a weak hand and a fit for opener's first suit?
xx, Q10xxx, Kxx, xxx?
3. Does responder suppress a fit in order to rebid a major even with a non-minimum responding hand?
x, Qxxxx, Kxx, Kxxx compared to xx KQxxx, Kxx, xxx

Here are my answers:
1. Guessing 2NT and cross my fingers
2. No way.
3. Depends.

[smerriman]

Winstonm, on 2021-September-22, 19:05, said:

Seems to me this is a non-issue when if you have enough to be in game with a fit. The question to me is this: why am I rebidding the major? Why would I rebid the major with a weak hand and a fit for partner?

A few questions I have assuming the auction is 1C-1H-2D-?

2. Does responder rebid the major with a weak hand and a fit for opener's first suit?
xx, Q10xxx, Kxx, xxx?

Yes - I thought we came to an agreement on this in the other thread

Here are two typical minimum hands opener may have:

x Kxx AQxx AKxxx
Kxx x AQxx AKxxx

Do you really want to be in 3♣ with the former hand, like you will be after bidding 2NT? I want to be in 4♥, which I'll find by bidding 2♥. If opener has any other minimum, we'll still stop in 3♣, so we haven't lost anything. Discovering the extra heart fit changes responder's hand from weak to game forcing.

[Winstonm]

smerriman, on 2021-September-22, 19:23, said:

Yes - I thought we came to an agreement on this in the other thread

Here are two typical minimum hands opener may have:

x Kxx AQxx AKxxx
Kxx x AQxx AKxxx

Do you really want to be in 3♣ with the former hand, like you will be after bidding 2NT? I want to be in 4♥, which I'll find by bidding 2♥. If opener has any other minimum, we'll still stop in 3♣, so we haven't lost anything. Discovering the extra heart fit changes responder's hand from weak to game forcing.

It's a reasonable argument - but if you are going to bid game, how do you then find a club slam when the 2H bid isn't so minimum and you've eaten up all that room?

Here's my issue: partner has shown 9 cards in the minors - why am I asking for 3 out of a maximum of 4 missing cards be in my suit. Don't get me wrong - I see your point. And the heart game is a worthy goal. But to me it is similar to rebidding a 5 card suit over a 1 NT rebid by partner: he may have 3 but he may not.

With a reverse, it is even more likely he does not.
All told, this could simply be my personal bias talking.

[smerriman]

Winstonm, on 2021-September-22, 21:19, said:

It's a reasonable argument - but if you are going to bid game, how do you then find a club slam when the 2H bid isn't so minimum and you've eaten up all that room?

Eaten up what room? The alternative 2NT eats up more room than 2♥ does, and doesn't show *any* suits.. how does that make it easier to find slam?

Yes, it's unlikely partner has hearts, but when you have a way to find out that comes at no cost, why not try?

I'm gathering you're saying there is a cost in another sequence; I just can't understand what sequence that might be. Perhaps a specific example would help?

(If you have a normal GF, you can support partner directly - don't need to show a 5 card heart suit. I'm only talking about your case #2, when you have a weak hand initially - your only plausible bids are 2♥ and 2NT).

[Winstonm]

smerriman, on 2021-September-22, 21:54, said:

Eaten up what room? The alternative 2NT eats up more room than 2♥ does, and doesn't show *any* suits.. how does that make it easier to find slam?

Yes, it's unlikely partner has hearts, but when you have a way to find out that comes at no cost, why not try?

I'm gathering you're saying there is a cost in another sequence; I just can't understand what sequence that might be. Perhaps a specific example would help?

(If you have a normal GF, you can support partner directly - don't need to show a 5 card heart suit. I'm only talking about your case #2, when you have a weak hand initially - your only plausible bids are 2♥ and 2NT).

Btw, I'm not trying to argue but trying to figure out if my thinking here is skewed.
1C-1H-2D-2H-4H
This would never happen with club support and a non-minimum ?
Also, how can opener know your secondary fits? KQx, Jxxxx, xx, xxx isn't a good game opposite a 1345 shaped minimum.

You say there is no cost to the 2H bid. Here is my thinking, right or wrong.

Let's say opener is 2245 and responder is 3514 and the auction proceeds as you say to 2H. I assume opener bids 2N pver 2H. When responder corrects to 3C how much hand does he have? How does opener know if that is forcing or a signoff?

To me, ambiguity is a cost.

[DavidKok]

Winstonm, on 2021-September-23, 07:30, said:

1C-1H-2D-2H-4H
This would never happen with club support and a non-minimum ?

Are you saying you might want to be in slam, but your ability to investigate it has been harmed by one partner jumping from two to four? Can I humbly suggest that opener not jump to four on this sequence?

[Winstonm]

DavidKok, on 2021-September-23, 08:15, said:

Are you saying you might want to be in slam, but your ability to investigate it has been harmed by one partner jumping from two to four? Can I humbly suggest that opener not jump to four on this sequence?

Sure, but are you making 3H game force then? What if responder has KQx, xxxxx, xx, Jxx? And if it is not forcing, what is opener to do with a stronger reverse?

Again. not trying to be difficult. Just double checking my thinking .

[DavidKok]

I play 1♣-1♥; 2♦-2♥; 3♥ as forcing. Your example responder hand would bypass the heart suit and bid Lebensohl/Ingberman/something weak to get to 3♣ - not just because it is hot garbage on the auction, but also because clubs rate to play better than hearts.

[Winstonm]

DavidKok, on 2021-September-23, 08:46, said:

I play 1♣-1♥; 2♦-2♥; 3♥ as forcing. Your example responder hand would bypass the heart suit and bid Lebensohl/Ingberman/something weak to get to 3♣ - not just because it is hot garbage on the auction, but also because clubs rate to play better than hearts.

That's pretty much my thinking. And even then it is a given that 3H crowds the auction when there is also a club fit (which has not been shown).

So, in short, my position is this: if responder has reason to believe a 5-3 heart fit will produce a decent play for game opposite a minimal reverse, rebid the major; otherwise, show your minor fit directly or via 2N if weak.

[Stephen Tu]

I don't think you have to play raise of 2H to 3H by opener as forcing. With a stronger raise just splinter. You don't need that much room because opener is reasonably tightly defined in terms of shape and strength, responder should be able to figure out which cards are useful and continue appropriately. I think it's a mistake to try to conserve space and have 3H be forcing; that implies opener is trying to leave room to figure out what responder has. But this is folly IMO; opener has shown way, way more of his hand; responder has only shown one suit. Let responder assume captaincy on these auctions.

If 3H is NF, now you can afford to reverse a bit lighter with fit, and find some games that you wouldn't if you need to keep your reverses strong since you have no way to stop in 3H partial.

If you are weak, I see no reason not to rebid major even with minor fit. Majors outscore minors at matchpoints. If partner has no fit you can always pull 2nt to 3m or pass 3m, and you haven't lost anything.
If you are strong enough *not* to bid 2nt (or 4th suit < 2nt if that is the agreement) intending to pass 3m (and thus are rebidding 3m, forcing), I would think by definition you are strong enough to want to be in the heart game if 5-3 fit, so again, why would you not want to rebid major?

The only time I would not necessarily rebid major by responder is when I have basically a slam try and I want to show real minor support unambiguously (or prefer to play in minor for slam rather than major if double fit), and don't really ever plan on playing 3nt.

[mw64ahw]

I'm in the non-forcing camp. Opener has 4 options at 3♥ and above a) bid game, c) force , show c) additional length/strength in the minors or d) limit their hand with a simple raise.
a) 3NT or 4♥
b) 3♠/4♠+
c) 4♣/4♦
d) 3♥ I have support, but not enough to make game opposite a minimum response. Bid game if you have enough; I'm not sure why you would want to play in 4 of a minor rather than major when support has been shown.

I prefer to keep all 4 options rather than removing d) as a place to play

[Gilithin]

Here are some ideas for the auction 1m - 1M -- 2R - 2M:-

1. Opener just bids out their shape: This comes recommended by the best player currently posting on BBF so should probably be seen as the default option. To me it feels much better suited to Strong Reverses though and I remain unconvinced it is so great playing the more traditional variety. It looks simple on the surface but requires quite a lot of discussion as to what is or is not forcing as the auction develops.

2. Opener bids 3M with fit+min; 2NT with no fit+min+stop; 4th suit with no fit+min+no stop; others GF: This was a suggestion from the previous thread. Personally I hate it but it is at least logical and consistent, so unlikely to be forgotten.

3. Opener bids 3M with fit+min; 2NT with no fit+min+stop; lowest suit bid with no fit+min+no stop; others GF: This feels to me like a vastly improved version of #2. You lose the ability to show a 6th ♣ naturally in many auctions but gain reasonable clarity. The artificial 3♣ with M=♠ is easy to forget.

4. Opener bids 3M with fit+min; Step 1 with no fit+min; others GF: This regains the ability to show the 6th ♣ but can wrong-side 3NT. Has the benefit of being simple.

5. Use #3 if M=♥ and #4 if M=♠: Gives a reasonable mix of pros vs cons but adds complexity.

In all of these methods, if Opener shows a minimum without fit, I think Responder's 3rd round 3m, 3R and 3M should be non-forcing and everything else is a GF. If Opener shows a minimum with fit, any call from Responder other than Pass or bidding game is a slam try. It is perhaps also worth noting that if you play Strong Reverses, there is more or less no such thing as a hand with a fit for Responder's major that does not want to be in game, so I would expect Opener's 3M over 2M to be forcing, or at least "forcing if you have a real response", in that case.

What is really best? No idea! Just agree something and stick to it.

[Gilithin]

To build on the previous post, there is also another way of building a sensible reversing structure, namely to play that Responder's 2M rebid is 5+ but non-forcing. The GF hands with 5 cards in the major then need to be bid via a different route, which will either be via Lebensohl followed by 3M or (for the sequence 1♣ - 1♥ -- 2♦) whichever of 2♠ or 2NT is not being use for Lebensohl or just a bid of the 4th suit. A combination probably makes most sense - going via 2NT shows 5M+stop, going via the 4th suit shows 5M without stop. The advantage of this approach is that it removes most of the bidding questions for this sequence (and very occasionally allows you to play 2M); the downside is that you get less information on the way to showing your "GF with 5M hand". Probably not worth it overall - making the cheapest call very narrow is rarely a good idea - but if the uncertainty in the 2M auction is an issue, this is a way of fixing that without giving up very much.

[y66]

Gilithin, on 2021-September-24, 09:24, said:

Here are some ideas for the auction 1m - 1M -- 2R - 2M:-

1. Opener just bids out their shape: This comes recommended by the best player currently posting on BBF so should probably be seen as the default option. To me it feels much better suited to Strong Reverses though and I remain unconvinced it is so great playing the more traditional variety. It looks simple on the surface but requires quite a lot of discussion as to what is or is not forcing as the auction develops.

2. Opener bids 3M with fit+min; 2NT with no fit+min+stop; 4th suit with no fit+min+no stop; others GF: This was a suggestion from the previous thread. Personally I hate it but it is at least logical and consistent, so unlikely to be forgotten.

3. Opener bids 3M with fit+min; 2NT with no fit+min+stop; lowest suit bid with no fit+min+no stop; others GF: This feels to me like a vastly improved version of #2. You lose the ability to show a 6th ♣ naturally in many auctions but gain reasonable clarity. The artificial 3♣ with M=♠ is easy to forget.

4. Opener bids 3M with fit+min; Step 1 with no fit+min; others GF: This regains the ability to show the 6th ♣ but can wrong-side 3NT. Has the benefit of being simple.

5. Use #3 if M=♥ and #4 if M=♠: Gives a reasonable mix of pros vs cons but adds complexity.

In all of these methods, if Opener shows a minimum without fit, I think Responder's 3rd round 3m, 3R and 3M should be non-forcing and everything else is a GF. If Opener shows a minimum with fit, any call from Responder other than Pass or bidding game is a slam try. It is perhaps also worth noting that if you play Strong Reverses, there is more or less no such thing as a hand with a fit for Responder's major that does not want to be in game, so I would expect Opener's 3M over 2M to be forcing, or at least "forcing if you have a real response", in that case.

What is really best? No idea! Just agree something sensible and semi-standard in your neck of the woods and stick to it.

fyp