[120248]

ME
1♣ 1♦ 1♥ 2♦
?

My hand : ♠ KQ93 ♥ Q2 ♦ KQ3 ♣ 10742

Is 2♠ a reverse here ?

If no, SDhould i bid 2 spades ?

Ty all

[gwnn]

Yes it is.

You should pass because you have a minimum balanced hand.

[ArtK78]

+1

[rmnka447]

+ 2 -- I agree with what gwnn said.

You are in a "free bid" situation as partner still gets a chance to bid if you pass. So any bid you make shows extras in strength or distribution. That's not what you have -- you have a minimum opener so you should pass.

2 ♠ is a reverse showing 17+ presumably with ♠s and longer ♣s. Double would about 16+ and no clear cut action. 2 ♥ or 3 ♥ show 4+ ♥s with the same values you'd have without the intervening bid. 3 ♣ shows ♣ length and a decent honor holding but not necessarily anything extra.

By passing, you do two things, you convey to partner that you have a minimum opener and leave room for partner to take the initiative.

If partner barely had enough values to chock out a response, then partner can pass and you'll have avoided getting in over your heads. Partner can double with at least 9+ HCP (to unlimited) and no clear cut bid. You'll then know that your side has at least half the points and can compete. Your pass also opens the way for partner to rebid ♥ at the 2 level with long ♥ and some scattered values (say ♠ xx ♥ A109xxx ♦ xx ♣ Kxx) -- you'll get to a nice partscore or push the opponents up a level. Partner can bid 2 ♠ which should show 11+ with 4 ♠ and longer hearts. Partner can raise ♣ with 11+ and a club fit. Partner can jump in ♥ with 11-12 and long ♥s.

After the 2 ♦ raise by advancer, you can't really know who has what at the table. The ♦ overcaller might be bidding more on guts than values and advancer might be raising on vapor. OTOH, overcaller could have a full opener and advancer could have a chunky raise OR it could be any combination of values in between. So by passing you open the way for your partnership to define what values it has and make sensible decisions to compete, bid game, or pass.

[dwar0123]

I thought for a bid to be a reverse you had to bypass your first bid suit. As you can not bid 2♣ here, I don't think 2♠ can be a reverse.

That said, it may still be showing extra's due to partner still having a bid. But I don't think it is a reverse.

[TimG]

 dwar0123, on 2012-September-24, 13:17, said:

I thought for a bid to be a reverse you had to bypass your first bid suit. As you can not bid 2♣ here, I don't think 2♠ can be a reverse.

I was taught that a reverse is a non-jump bid in a higher ranking suit second in such a way that forces the three-level if partner wants to take preference to your first bid suit.

I think under your definition, the (non-competitive) sequence 1H-1S-3C would qualify as a reverse because opener bypassed 2H.

But, I agree with you that "reverse" in the context of a competitive auction may not be quite right.

[dwar0123]

 TimG, on 2012-September-24, 13:30, said:

I think under your definition, the (non-competitive) sequence 1H-1S-3C would qualify as a reverse because opener bypassed 2H.

I should have said bypass your first bid lower ranked suit.

[ArtK78]

Since we want to define our terms, I thought I would go to that place where all arguments are settled - Wikipedia!

Here are a few definitions of a reverse from Wikipedia:

A reverse, in the card game contract bridge, is a bidding sequence designed to show additional strength without the need to make a jump bid; specifically two suits are bid in the reverse order to that expected by the basic bidding system. Precise methods and definitions vary with country and system. In Standard American a reverse is defined by William S. Root as "... a nonjump bid at the two-level in a new suit that ranks higher than the suit you bid first", and by Bridge World as "a non-jump bid in a new suit that bypasses a bid in a lower-ranking suit already bid by the same player". The Acol definition is somewhat wider and includes any bid of a new suit by opener higher than two of their first suit.

Footnotes omitted.

Clearly, by any of these definitions, the 2♠ bid in the original post is a reverse.

[mycroft]

The answer to all^* "Is that a reverse?" questions is "yes. Are you asking if it shows extras?"

Like all the responders, I agree with pass here, and by no means introduce the spades. You distort your hand shape (you're balanced, and if partner puts you back in clubs, you're not going to like it), your strength (this reverse *does* show extras, because partner may have nothing, and will likely have to play 3♣ or 3♥ on possibly a 20-20 7-card fit), and you don't show anything useful.

You don't show anything useful, because with both majors partner would have doubled. Okay, with 4=5 or 4=6, maybe no, but with 4=5, partner will double 2♦ when it gets around to him, and with 4=6, he'll likely rebid his hearts. And if he doesn't, he may just be right anyway. Never let 'em play 2 of a fit is my motto, but sometimes they've massively underbid - and never is another one of those * words.

Overcaller also has a call - it might just be 3♣, and now you're on lead to 3NT, and all you need is a spade honour in partner's hand and some reasonable breaks to set it. Yes, partner will lead a club instead of a spade into a diamond contract, but that's the price you pay for playing 5-card Majors.

^*For bridge values of 'all'. When was the last time my answer wasn't right?

[dwar0123]

 ArtK78, on 2012-September-24, 13:43, said:

Since we want to define our terms, I thought I would go to that place where all arguments are settled - Wikipedia!

Here are a few definitions of a reverse from Wikipedia:

, and by Bridge World as "a non-jump bid in a new suit that bypasses a bid in a lower-ranking suit already bid by the same

Footnotes omitted.

Clearly, by any of these definitions, the 2♠ bid in the original post is a reverse.

Weird, cause I clearly read that definition as stating it is not a reverse.

[sailoranch]

I think a three-level reverse would be something like 1M - 2♦ - 3♣. But the methods are different after a two-level response, of course.

[the hog]

 120248, on 2012-September-23, 08:57, said:

ME
1♣ 1♦ 1♥ 2♦
?

My hand : ♠ KQ93 ♥ Q2 ♦ KQ3 ♣ 10742

Is 2♠ a reverse here ?

If no, SDhould i bid 2 spades ?

Ty all

Yes, 2S is a reverse and yes you should pass.

[aguahombre]

 sailoranch, on 2012-September-24, 19:33, said:

I think a three-level reverse would be something like 1M - 2♦ - 3♣. But the methods are different after a two-level response, of course.

That is called a "high reverse". There is disagreement among players whose 2 diamond bid was game-forcing as to whether 3C shows extra playing strength. For those whose 2D bid was not game-forcing there should be no doubt; it must show extras.

But, that is off-topic. You gotta pass the given hand.

[MrAce]

 dwar0123, on 2012-September-24, 13:33, said:

I should have said bypass your first bid lower ranked suit.

You are wrong. Dont let these scientific fancy definitions confuse you. Here is a simple explenation how i used to teach it to my students.

-If responder can make a simple preference of openers 1st suit at 2 level, then opener did not make a reverse. If responder is forced to make this preference at 3 level then opener made a reverse.

OR

-If openers rebid of a new suit disables his side from playing a 2 level contract of his first suit then it is reverse, if not then it is not reverse.

1♣ (1♦) 1♥ 2♦
2♠

Can we play 2 clubs anymore ? No--->then it is reverse

1♥ (pass) 1♠ (2♣)
2♦

Can we play 2 ♥ anymore ? Yes ---->It aint reverse

Note that when replying to a negative double, especially in the major suit pd implied reverse does not apply.

1♦-(1♥)-DBL-(2♥)
2♠

We can not play 2♦ anymore, but the suit opener bid was not totally new suit, it is like as if pd bid 1♠ and we are raising him, not introducing a totally new suit.

But any formula, including mine is not as good as understanding the logic behind it. As you can see in all of those examples (except the negative double one) opener is introducing a new suit in a way that consumes a lot of space or costs a whole level just to hear pd is broke, without an extablished fit yet, as you can easily tell you need to have extras both in shape and hcp since this bid gets us high real quick.

 120248, on 2012-September-23, 08:57, said:

Is 2♠ a reverse here ?

If no, SDhould i bid 2 spades ?

Yes it is reverse

No you shouldnt. Also keep in mind that when opener bids a new suit at 2 level, reverse or not, theoretically he promises 5-4 hand, not 4-4 although there are some exceptions to that with 4441 hands if you are not comfortable rebidding NT or if your hand is out of NT range that it will show.

[mike777]

geez reverses and responses are confusing.

I prefer Root/pavlicek's version but grant you can come up with handsthat are tough.

[akwoo]

Yes it is a reverse.

Partner has implicitly denied having 4 spades by not making a negative double over 1♦. (This is the logic I usually use to explain reverses - you are bidding a 4 card suit that partner has implied (though it's not 100%) he or she does not have support for.)

(Here the exception is if partner also has 5 hearts, but if your partner is strong enough for this to matter, he or she can reverse as responder by bidding 2♠.)

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

It is, nevertheless it is different.

Reverses are in uncontested auction, but the given seq. is a contested one.

Most likely standard is to play the Reverse still as showing add. strength,
but I am not sure, if it is the same strength, and if 2S is still forcing.

To a certain degree, you are in a prebalancing situation, and the hand with
shortage in ther suit should act, given that a double is Support Double,
showing 3 cards in hearts you may have to find a bid with 5422, and I prefer
bidding my 5 carder.

The above statement gives also a clue, what you should do with the hand you
happen to hold.
You have length in their suit, in other words partner has shortage in their
suit, hence it is partners task to act, if the bidding comes to him, he should
strain to bid - it is not a good option to let them play in a fit on the 2 level.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: Just read, that partner denied four spades bidding 1H, ... this is a possible
style, but so is bidding 1H, when holding 5 hearts and four spades.

[helene_t]

If double shows 4 spades, is it so bad to double with this hand? As long as partner will bid 2♠ rather than 3♣ with 3433, it seems to me that little can go wrong. Of course if partner expects extra values and forces to game with 10 (or invites with 8) it will go wrong.

[dwar0123]

 MrAce, on 2012-September-24, 22:52, said:

You are wrong. Dont let these scientific fancy definitions confuse you. Here is a simple explenation how i used to teach it to my students.

-If responder can make a simple preference of openers 1st suit at 2 level, then opener did not make a reverse. If responder is forced to make this preference at 3 level then opener made a reverse.

OR

-If openers rebid of a new suit disables his side from playing a 2 level contract of his first suit then it is reverse, if not then it is not reverse.

What about 1♦ (2♣) 2♥ P 2♠

A reverse by your definition.

I've seen a lot of definitions, including the one I am going with which is the quoted bridge world one. Bids might show extra values by the nature of forcing to the 3 level, but a reverse is when you personally bypass your own lower ranked first bid suit to show a 2nd suit.

Hence the OP problem is not a reverse, though passing is still correct.

[aguahombre]

 dwar0123, on 2012-September-25, 11:11, said:

What about 1♦ (2♣) 2♥ P 2♠

A reverse by your definition.

No. The 2♥ bid is what disabled playing in 2 of opener's first suit, not the 2♠ bid. Timo's definition still stands. I like the term "non-jump" to be in there also, but that's not relevant to his point.