10 June 2011

When is a reverse not a reverse?

I know a lot of people have strong feelings about what "standard bidding" means. Sometimes I think it should have a capital letter. Here's your chance to give your opinion on what turned out to be a much more contentious issue than I anticipated.

I'm reasonably confident the range of your NT won't be a factor here but strong club players might not have the same views Here's the auction:

NorthEastSouthWest
1 1 2 Pass
2

I'm interested in any and all points of view on this. I think 2 is always forcing but does it show the extras of a reverse and is it game forcing? Would it make a difference if South were dealer and North had opened after two passes?

I'm asking is the above auction most similar to this:

NorthEastSouthWest
1 Pass 2 Pass
2♠

Or this?
NorthEastSouthWest
1 Pass 2♣ Pass
2

5 comments:

  1. Definitely not a reverse for me as 2♦ is forcing for one round. You need some way to show a hand that would have rebid 1♥ over a 1♦ response if they have been no interference.

    Those who play negative free bids, where 2♦ is non-forcing, will need extra values for 2♥. But I would regard this as non-standard.

    ReplyDelete
  2. My opinion is that when 2H is the cheapest possible rebid to a forcing 2D call, it can hardly promise extra values.

    For opener's second bid to promise extra (what some people call "reversing") values, the rebid must be higher than a minimum rebid of the opened suit. In your example, the minimum level of clubs that opener could rebid is 3C; because 2H bid is below 3C, it is not a reverse.

    In an uncontested auction by a 2/1 gf pair, the definition of a reverse is not altered, but whether all reverses promise extra values is a matter of partnership agreement.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Agree with both the above. It's the cheapest available bid, it can't possibly be a reverse.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Forcing, but doesn't show extra values. If Hearts not bid here, we could miss a 4-4 Heart fit. Certainly not a reverse showing extra values in 2/1 and I believe the same is true in "Standard American".

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thank you all for your comments! They back up my interpretation that when you force partner to bid you can't expect them to have values.

    Interesting that 2/1 players agree, I hadn't considered that angle.

    ReplyDelete