Hi all,
One of my protegees asked me some time ago to put together some guidelines for opening 6/5 hands when the major is the five bagger and a minor is the longer six bagger--and the hand does not have reverse values.
One thing I need to share up front is that my mentor taught me a valuable lesson in my early years: any 6/5 hand opposite the right opening bid makes slam. Repeat that 100 times before you go to sleep at night.
Reverse values start with meaty 16 counts. One can give some 6/5 hands reverse values even with lower high card point values. Trouble is, those hands have to have playing strength.
For example, AJ654,4,KQ6543,6 is not a reverse strength hand, but something like this might be: AJT98,JT,KQT987,v. So, if you think you have enough playing strength for a reverse, then go ahead and bid out your pattern, minor followed by the major.
If you have a 65 hand without reverse values, then there are to main points to consider: 1) How many suits are in between the two that you have. 2) How strong is one suit relative to the other.
So, for example, if your suits are six clubs and five spades, you have two suits between the blacks, namely diamonds and hearts. So you can handle a bid from your partner at the one level and rebid spades without reversing at the two level. However if your suits are diamonds and hearts, then you're in trouble immediately if it goes 1D 1S--and you don't have the values/playing strength for a reverse. Now you need to evaluate whether switching the order in which you bid the suits may be right.
Another strong indicator of the order in which you should open the suits is the strength of the relative suits. Suppose your hand were: A5432,4,AKJ543,5. Now, one would likely open 1D because you want that to be trump. However, should your hand be: AKJ43, 5,A97543,6 one would likely open 1S.
These bids are hard for us all. Once, vul at imps I held 65,98743,AKQJ54,v. Well, the bridge Gods don't give me solid tricks in my hand very often so I opened 1D. I was most surprised when all the experts chose to pass the hand and "show" the hand later somehow. I don't know how to let on to partner that you passed a six trick hand initially, but apparentl;y the experts do.
So to sum up. There are three things to consider: playing strength, how many suits are between the 6/5 suits, and relative strength of the suits.
And here's the real rub. If you get them all right, you'll be playing much better than the experts.
Hope this is somewhat helpful, please ask if you have further questions.
Friday, April 9, 2010
Monday, February 8, 2010
What bridge players can learn from football
Hi all,
Well another football season is over and it's time to write another blog spot on one of my favorite topics: gleaning winning strategies from other competitive endeavors.
Who can relate to 2009/2010 season when Bret Favre in the instrumental moments of a quarterfinal game took a high risk call to blow a chance in the playoffs? Conservative run was needed instead of a high risk pass--interception. Who's done similar things at the bridge table?
Who can relate to the final superbowl game (Colts vs Saints) where onside kicks, two point conversions and blitzes were made at the appropriate times and executed appropriately for a Saints win. Who's done similar things at the bridge table?
It has always amazed me that in team events, most players in lower level competitions concentrate on individual execution, solo or within the partnerships, to promote a win without fully analyzing or paying attention to what is needed to win the event.
I speak from experience. Once in a relatively tough flight A event we had "won" the event before the final two matches were played. Phone calls were placed to "home folks" that the Knaap team was clearly leading and would easily slide into the first place position. What happened? One of the partnerships ended up playing 3DXX in opponents' suit. The result: a 1 VP overall loss. Was somebody paying attention to what needed to be done, or were players just executing as per the first two rounds of the event? Who wouldn't sell out a low level contract before confusing the issue for an "at most" lose five imps?
I had another example last Salem tourney. As promoted by team captain Knaap, if there is anything on the line at all before the last match, it pays to execute a team "huddle" to assess the placement of the team at that point in the competition.
The situation was clear, on a 20 VP scale we were leading second and third by 7/9 vp's respectively. We took a look, the opposing team seemed OK! but we knew we had a chance to nail this thing here. I told the team that we didn't need to win by a huge margin but that a small margin win would make us unquestioned victors of the Sunday team event. My advice to the players? "Slow down, think and stay steady. Take advantage of any mistakes."
So what happened? The team had to score up a grand off a cashing ace vul. Lose 17. Yep, it was admitted that listening to the captain(ess) might have been appropriate at this important juncture of the competition. We did end up winning the event, however, since no one blitzed to put us second/third and teammates managed to cover a -17.
So here's the deal. In almost every other serious competitive endeavor, someone keeps an eye on what needs to be done while the individual competitors concentrate on execution. The football teams have a myriad of coaches at all levels. Baseball has their first and third base coaches. The gymnasts have spotters and coaches who say when the high risk moves are needed to win the competition, or when they are to be avoided to possibly turn a win into a loss.
So as you are entering the final rounds of a team competition, at least take a moment to get the team together and recognize what needs to be done and plant a firm reminder in everyone's consciousness. It seems only normal as this is done in most other competitions --sport or otherwise.
I'm not sure this is universal thinking, but you might try it and see if it works.
I would be glad to answer any further questions.
Well another football season is over and it's time to write another blog spot on one of my favorite topics: gleaning winning strategies from other competitive endeavors.
Who can relate to 2009/2010 season when Bret Favre in the instrumental moments of a quarterfinal game took a high risk call to blow a chance in the playoffs? Conservative run was needed instead of a high risk pass--interception. Who's done similar things at the bridge table?
Who can relate to the final superbowl game (Colts vs Saints) where onside kicks, two point conversions and blitzes were made at the appropriate times and executed appropriately for a Saints win. Who's done similar things at the bridge table?
It has always amazed me that in team events, most players in lower level competitions concentrate on individual execution, solo or within the partnerships, to promote a win without fully analyzing or paying attention to what is needed to win the event.
I speak from experience. Once in a relatively tough flight A event we had "won" the event before the final two matches were played. Phone calls were placed to "home folks" that the Knaap team was clearly leading and would easily slide into the first place position. What happened? One of the partnerships ended up playing 3DXX in opponents' suit. The result: a 1 VP overall loss. Was somebody paying attention to what needed to be done, or were players just executing as per the first two rounds of the event? Who wouldn't sell out a low level contract before confusing the issue for an "at most" lose five imps?
I had another example last Salem tourney. As promoted by team captain Knaap, if there is anything on the line at all before the last match, it pays to execute a team "huddle" to assess the placement of the team at that point in the competition.
The situation was clear, on a 20 VP scale we were leading second and third by 7/9 vp's respectively. We took a look, the opposing team seemed OK! but we knew we had a chance to nail this thing here. I told the team that we didn't need to win by a huge margin but that a small margin win would make us unquestioned victors of the Sunday team event. My advice to the players? "Slow down, think and stay steady. Take advantage of any mistakes."
So what happened? The team had to score up a grand off a cashing ace vul. Lose 17. Yep, it was admitted that listening to the captain(ess) might have been appropriate at this important juncture of the competition. We did end up winning the event, however, since no one blitzed to put us second/third and teammates managed to cover a -17.
So here's the deal. In almost every other serious competitive endeavor, someone keeps an eye on what needs to be done while the individual competitors concentrate on execution. The football teams have a myriad of coaches at all levels. Baseball has their first and third base coaches. The gymnasts have spotters and coaches who say when the high risk moves are needed to win the competition, or when they are to be avoided to possibly turn a win into a loss.
So as you are entering the final rounds of a team competition, at least take a moment to get the team together and recognize what needs to be done and plant a firm reminder in everyone's consciousness. It seems only normal as this is done in most other competitions --sport or otherwise.
I'm not sure this is universal thinking, but you might try it and see if it works.
I would be glad to answer any further questions.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
(1N) X --handle this treatment for optimum results
Hi all,
It is always with great pleasure that I, through this forum, get to review the teachings of my mentor. This subject presents another occasion. I too well remember discussing different methods of competing over opponent's NT. The retort was this "I loathe to give up the penalty X over NT". There was no qualifier there --i.e. baby, weak or strong NT. Penalty X's over all NT can reap huge rewards.
I can share with you that through my own experience I have reaped a wealth of mp and imps from this treatment. Unfortunately I have not reaped the optimum results because of an inability of the partnership to field the penalty X over NT properly.
First, let me say that a penalty X over NT could be a balanced hand at the top of the opponent's NT range. However, it's important that one has prime cards and/or a source of tricks. Using a penalty X over a strong nt with this hand: QJ4,KJ,QJ543,KQ is ill advised. Please have at least a prme seventeen count or a solid suit somewhere. Also, be aware that penalty X's can be made with one or two suited hands also. Here are some examples: AKQ10xxx, xx, x, Axx; AKQJxx, xx, xx, Axx; AKQxx, xx, xx, AKJ10.
The idea here is that you suspect the opponents will never sit for 1NX with these hands. They'll run out to their own suit. Now when you compete over that with your own suit, your partner will know that you have an extraordinary strong hand. Remember jumps over strong NT are preemptive. This is the way to show strength (although one can jump with strength over weak nt)
The down side about maintaining this treatment in your partnership is that one needs to discuss with what types of hands one pulls the penalty X's. My teaching says that with a balanced hand you sit, period. If you're 4333, 4432, 5332 you sit. Get it, you sit, I don't care what your strength is. The idea is that even with a zero count there is no guarantee that your side is in a fit and might get X'd off for a number. And if by chance you happen to be -180 (1NX making one) then that is the risk you take. That -180 is probably a lot less than what you would get being X'd off in your two level contract on a 4/2 fit.
Just three days ago all vul at imps I held this hand: 8542,876,53,8532 . Pard opened 1N and rho X'd. Poker face I sat quietly and watched lho squirm. 2D PHEW PHEW PHEW. The opponents were plus 130 when they could have had a telephone number. PHEW PHEW PHEW. Lho had forgotten an important rule about penatly X's over nt. Pass with a balanced hand.
Some time ago I picked up this beaut over 1N. AKxx,Kxx,KQJx,Ax. It didn't take me long to find the red card. My partner bid 2S. Thinking he would have Jxxxxx,x,xxx,xxx or the like I blasted to four spades thinking we could probably make five. Down two. There went the masterpoint race for the tournament to my opponent. Heavy price to pay! My partner had pulled my penaty X with four spades and had to play the entire hand from the dummy.
If you're going to maintain the X as penatly over 1N --I can guarantee you'll get some stellar results. I certainly have. But field it properly! or else you'll be fighting each other instead of your opponents!
If you have any questions, I'd be willing to answer them.
It is always with great pleasure that I, through this forum, get to review the teachings of my mentor. This subject presents another occasion. I too well remember discussing different methods of competing over opponent's NT. The retort was this "I loathe to give up the penalty X over NT". There was no qualifier there --i.e. baby, weak or strong NT. Penalty X's over all NT can reap huge rewards.
I can share with you that through my own experience I have reaped a wealth of mp and imps from this treatment. Unfortunately I have not reaped the optimum results because of an inability of the partnership to field the penalty X over NT properly.
First, let me say that a penalty X over NT could be a balanced hand at the top of the opponent's NT range. However, it's important that one has prime cards and/or a source of tricks. Using a penalty X over a strong nt with this hand: QJ4,KJ,QJ543,KQ is ill advised. Please have at least a prme seventeen count or a solid suit somewhere. Also, be aware that penalty X's can be made with one or two suited hands also. Here are some examples: AKQ10xxx, xx, x, Axx; AKQJxx, xx, xx, Axx; AKQxx, xx, xx, AKJ10.
The idea here is that you suspect the opponents will never sit for 1NX with these hands. They'll run out to their own suit. Now when you compete over that with your own suit, your partner will know that you have an extraordinary strong hand. Remember jumps over strong NT are preemptive. This is the way to show strength (although one can jump with strength over weak nt)
The down side about maintaining this treatment in your partnership is that one needs to discuss with what types of hands one pulls the penalty X's. My teaching says that with a balanced hand you sit, period. If you're 4333, 4432, 5332 you sit. Get it, you sit, I don't care what your strength is. The idea is that even with a zero count there is no guarantee that your side is in a fit and might get X'd off for a number. And if by chance you happen to be -180 (1NX making one) then that is the risk you take. That -180 is probably a lot less than what you would get being X'd off in your two level contract on a 4/2 fit.
Just three days ago all vul at imps I held this hand: 8542,876,53,8532 . Pard opened 1N and rho X'd. Poker face I sat quietly and watched lho squirm. 2D PHEW PHEW PHEW. The opponents were plus 130 when they could have had a telephone number. PHEW PHEW PHEW. Lho had forgotten an important rule about penatly X's over nt. Pass with a balanced hand.
Some time ago I picked up this beaut over 1N. AKxx,Kxx,KQJx,Ax. It didn't take me long to find the red card. My partner bid 2S. Thinking he would have Jxxxxx,x,xxx,xxx or the like I blasted to four spades thinking we could probably make five. Down two. There went the masterpoint race for the tournament to my opponent. Heavy price to pay! My partner had pulled my penaty X with four spades and had to play the entire hand from the dummy.
If you're going to maintain the X as penatly over 1N --I can guarantee you'll get some stellar results. I certainly have. But field it properly! or else you'll be fighting each other instead of your opponents!
If you have any questions, I'd be willing to answer them.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Competing over 1M (X).. do it aggressively
Last weekend, I had the pleasure of competing with one of the top players of the Seattle area. NV vs Vul at MP I opened 1S in first chair. Lefty made a TOX and partner, without any hesitation whatsover and with all the confidence in the world bid 2S holding: 652,842,J8542,JT.
Although this raise might be a little on the light side, most experts get in there over 1MX with less than the 5/6 points required for a normal raise. Why? First off, these bids are totally LAW protected. Have an eight card fit, compete to the two level. Note the emphasis on "compete". Don't promise you partner six points out of comp and emerge with 1.
Also, in these sequences a two level major suit bid takes away one or two levels of bidding from the opponents. For example, as in the above case --note that my RHO does not have the one level bid available, nor the jump to 3H. Rho is forced to compete to the three level on a very wide range of hands --almost anything that is not worth a 3S (gf) Q!!! Oh my. Competing light over 1H (X) takes away the 2S invitational jump.
If the layout is foul, only the most experience partnerships can catch you in a X'd contract. A X by the fourth hand is usually TO for the other suits and in order for the TOX'er to X again he/she needs relatively strong values.
Competing on a minimum with a major suit hand over a TOX is just solid expert bridge. However, here's the problem. Last weekend, at imps, my partner made a game try on this hand over my 2S raise. AQJxxx,AT98,Ax,K. I refused the invitation on Jxx,J9xxx,J,Axxx. The problem is obvious...If partner thinks I can have a 1 count, he/she makes a game try. If partner thinks I have a normal "in comp bid" i.e. 7+ more points, he/she jumps to game. The ultimate gaffe was not having discussed the issue.
Lots of expert partnerships have methods to delineate the 3 to a bad 7 point raise from an good 7 to a 10 point raise. Some use a 2D artificial bid for the strong raise, leaving the major support bid for "garbage". Thus 1M (X) 2D! means: "I have a solid raise to 2M, pard, says nothing about diamonds". Some use a transfer system to announce a good raise.
All systems protect the direct natural raise as "weak"- 1M (X) 2M! garbage. Why? it totally takes away bidding room from opps, it's law protected and very hard to catch if it's wrong (i.e. the layout is foul). Hope this is somewhat helpful. This is a necessary discussion to have with all your growing/learning partnerships.
Although this raise might be a little on the light side, most experts get in there over 1MX with less than the 5/6 points required for a normal raise. Why? First off, these bids are totally LAW protected. Have an eight card fit, compete to the two level. Note the emphasis on "compete". Don't promise you partner six points out of comp and emerge with 1.
Also, in these sequences a two level major suit bid takes away one or two levels of bidding from the opponents. For example, as in the above case --note that my RHO does not have the one level bid available, nor the jump to 3H. Rho is forced to compete to the three level on a very wide range of hands --almost anything that is not worth a 3S (gf) Q!!! Oh my. Competing light over 1H (X) takes away the 2S invitational jump.
If the layout is foul, only the most experience partnerships can catch you in a X'd contract. A X by the fourth hand is usually TO for the other suits and in order for the TOX'er to X again he/she needs relatively strong values.
Competing on a minimum with a major suit hand over a TOX is just solid expert bridge. However, here's the problem. Last weekend, at imps, my partner made a game try on this hand over my 2S raise. AQJxxx,AT98,Ax,K. I refused the invitation on Jxx,J9xxx,J,Axxx. The problem is obvious...If partner thinks I can have a 1 count, he/she makes a game try. If partner thinks I have a normal "in comp bid" i.e. 7+ more points, he/she jumps to game. The ultimate gaffe was not having discussed the issue.
Lots of expert partnerships have methods to delineate the 3 to a bad 7 point raise from an good 7 to a 10 point raise. Some use a 2D artificial bid for the strong raise, leaving the major support bid for "garbage". Thus 1M (X) 2D! means: "I have a solid raise to 2M, pard, says nothing about diamonds". Some use a transfer system to announce a good raise.
All systems protect the direct natural raise as "weak"- 1M (X) 2M! garbage. Why? it totally takes away bidding room from opps, it's law protected and very hard to catch if it's wrong (i.e. the layout is foul). Hope this is somewhat helpful. This is a necessary discussion to have with all your growing/learning partnerships.
Monday, August 24, 2009
Leading A, K and Q's against NT
Hi All,
There are as many discussions about leading A/K/Q against no-trump as there are bridge players. I thought I'd get my opinion down on the matter and we can use these methods to win bridge competitions. Too fun.
Suppose your opponents have landed in 3N and you hold something like AKJT(x) in a suit. Cool. Now, you would not want to lead low, or the J and see Qx in the dummy. Nor would you like it if declarer had Qx. So with these types of power hands I lead the A. It requires my partner to unload the Q if he/she has it --so I'm not left to wonder. If he/she does not have that card, I require partner to give me a count card. Now, I know when the Q is falling in declarer's hand or if it's better that I abandon the suit and let partner lead through declarer later. In the meantime, partner knows my holding and can place some serious defensive points!
Now, suppose opponents have landed in 3N and you decided that it is optimum to lead from these holdings: AKxx, AKx, KQx, etc. Now, I lead the K! This requires partner to give me an attitude card. Do you like the suit I chose, pard, do you have an honor or length and shall I continue.
On every convention card you have the holding KQT9 in the "honor card lead" sections. It is usually advantageous to lead the Q from this holding requiring partner to unload the J if he/she has it. If partner does not unload the J, it is adventagious for partner to give you an attitude card. Sure, it would be good for partner to give a count card so that you know when the J will fall but here's the rub. One leads the Q in many situations --QJTx, QJ9x, QJx. For all these leads you obviously don't need partner to unload the J --you're staring at it. However you do need to know if you can continue the suit safely. On Q leads I require partner to unload the J or give me an atittude card. Heaven forbid I lead from QJ9x continually into declarer's AKT. Ugly. An attitude card from pard denoting honor cards in the suit or length and I/we can defend much better.
Hope this makes some sense. Not all people adopt these treatments so make sure it is a discussion point with your serious partners.
If you have any questions, let me know.
Isolde
There are as many discussions about leading A/K/Q against no-trump as there are bridge players. I thought I'd get my opinion down on the matter and we can use these methods to win bridge competitions. Too fun.
Suppose your opponents have landed in 3N and you hold something like AKJT(x) in a suit. Cool. Now, you would not want to lead low, or the J and see Qx in the dummy. Nor would you like it if declarer had Qx. So with these types of power hands I lead the A. It requires my partner to unload the Q if he/she has it --so I'm not left to wonder. If he/she does not have that card, I require partner to give me a count card. Now, I know when the Q is falling in declarer's hand or if it's better that I abandon the suit and let partner lead through declarer later. In the meantime, partner knows my holding and can place some serious defensive points!
Now, suppose opponents have landed in 3N and you decided that it is optimum to lead from these holdings: AKxx, AKx, KQx, etc. Now, I lead the K! This requires partner to give me an attitude card. Do you like the suit I chose, pard, do you have an honor or length and shall I continue.
On every convention card you have the holding KQT9 in the "honor card lead" sections. It is usually advantageous to lead the Q from this holding requiring partner to unload the J if he/she has it. If partner does not unload the J, it is adventagious for partner to give you an attitude card. Sure, it would be good for partner to give a count card so that you know when the J will fall but here's the rub. One leads the Q in many situations --QJTx, QJ9x, QJx. For all these leads you obviously don't need partner to unload the J --you're staring at it. However you do need to know if you can continue the suit safely. On Q leads I require partner to unload the J or give me an atittude card. Heaven forbid I lead from QJ9x continually into declarer's AKT. Ugly. An attitude card from pard denoting honor cards in the suit or length and I/we can defend much better.
Hope this makes some sense. Not all people adopt these treatments so make sure it is a discussion point with your serious partners.
If you have any questions, let me know.
Isolde
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
1C (1H) X (P) --Some Nifty Actions by Opener!
Hi all
I wanted to share with you some expert secrets of these sequences. This weekend, the bridge Gods gave me these tickets: KQ4,T98,K84,KQT9 NV at mp second seat. There you go, an aceless four by three thirteen count but probably warrants an opening. Hey, at least you have a T,9 spot. So, 1C (at least you can stand the lead). Lefty bids 1H and partner makes a negative X. Ok, there you are. What are you most likely to do? Bid 1S. You don't have four of them, but you don't even have as little as Jxx in the heart suit and your clubs...well probably not rebiddable given you only have four.
Now suppose you had this hand: KQ43,K98,K8,QT98 -This time you have four spades all right, but a nasty HK underneath the heart bidder. Ohhhhh, not so good. Again, 1S.
Now let's give you a better hand for the negative X. Let's say you opened 1C on KQ43,43,KT4,KQT9. Compared to the previous hands we've discussed, this is a beaut.
Experts bid an immediate 2S on this hand. Why?
1) To delineate this hand from the subminimum three card spade hand and/or honor values underneath the heart overcall.
2) They realize that with these hands you clearly belong at the two level anyway, due to the nature of the fit and the purity of the honor cards. If you don't jump there immediately, there is a good chance that opponents will push you there anyway.
Thus, over 1m (1H) X (P), a 1S bid says: "Given our combined resources, pard, we now have a subminum holding given the heart overcall. Please slow down the your assessment of the level at which you place the contract or compete.
a 2S bid says: "Full opening values, no heart honors wasted, and four card support".
Had my partner and I discussed these sequences, we might not have been in game opposite AJ98,642,AQJ2,75. And competed safely to the three level only.
Hope this is helpful. Ask if you have any questions.
I wanted to share with you some expert secrets of these sequences. This weekend, the bridge Gods gave me these tickets: KQ4,T98,K84,KQT9 NV at mp second seat. There you go, an aceless four by three thirteen count but probably warrants an opening. Hey, at least you have a T,9 spot. So, 1C (at least you can stand the lead). Lefty bids 1H and partner makes a negative X. Ok, there you are. What are you most likely to do? Bid 1S. You don't have four of them, but you don't even have as little as Jxx in the heart suit and your clubs...well probably not rebiddable given you only have four.
Now suppose you had this hand: KQ43,K98,K8,QT98 -This time you have four spades all right, but a nasty HK underneath the heart bidder. Ohhhhh, not so good. Again, 1S.
Now let's give you a better hand for the negative X. Let's say you opened 1C on KQ43,43,KT4,KQT9. Compared to the previous hands we've discussed, this is a beaut.
Experts bid an immediate 2S on this hand. Why?
1) To delineate this hand from the subminimum three card spade hand and/or honor values underneath the heart overcall.
2) They realize that with these hands you clearly belong at the two level anyway, due to the nature of the fit and the purity of the honor cards. If you don't jump there immediately, there is a good chance that opponents will push you there anyway.
Thus, over 1m (1H) X (P), a 1S bid says: "Given our combined resources, pard, we now have a subminum holding given the heart overcall. Please slow down the your assessment of the level at which you place the contract or compete.
a 2S bid says: "Full opening values, no heart honors wasted, and four card support".
Had my partner and I discussed these sequences, we might not have been in game opposite AJ98,642,AQJ2,75. And competed safely to the three level only.
Hope this is helpful. Ask if you have any questions.
Monday, May 25, 2009
The Reverse --its secrets revealed
Hi all,
It usually isn't long in a bridge journey before one becomes acquainted with the term "reverse". Hmmmm, I know this is a gear in my car, but what does it mean in terms of my bridge vocabulary.
I came across it this way. I had a very strong hand (two suiter) and opened it 1C. Partner bid 1S and I jump-shifted into hearts. When my dummy came down, a seasoned player said: "Isolde, you don't have to jump to show this hand". Thus, started my study of the "reverse" concept as it manifests itself in bridge bidding.
There are several (confusing) definitions of reverses but there are two which I like the best:
1) One reverses when one bids a higher ranking suit at the two level without a jump than one opened. Note, responder has only promised 6 points. Thus.....1C 1S, 2H is a reverse.
a) 1C 1H, 1S is not (second round of bidding does not start at the two level).
b)1D 1H, 2C is not (second suit is lower ranking than the first).
c) 1C 1D, 2H is not (note the jump)
2) One reverses when one asks responder to prefer the opened suit at the three level without a jump. Note, responder has only promised six points. If the bidding goes 1H 1N, 2S and responder prefers hearts, he/she has to do this at the three level. Thus, a reverse,
There are several musts about reverses and its best to practice them always:
1) Reverses show extra values. If you ask responder to pref the suit at the three level you should have combined resources to handle a contract at the three level. Reverse with a 13 point hand and responder owns only six--the pref at the three level will have to be played with 19 high card points between you. Not good. Have really good playing strength or at least 16 hcp as your extra values.
2) Reverses are shape-showing, that is the first suit is always longer than the second one --always. I had an opponent bid this hand 1C 1S, 2D against me this weekend. This hand was 4,A85,AQJT7,AK43. Note that diamonds are longer than clubs so this hand should have been shown through a strong jump shift, i.e. 1D 1S,3C.
3) One always promises one more bid after a reverse. Don't pass. (unless partnership agreements override this dictum).
There are many responder methods over reverses, some more standard than others. I have discussed them with most of my partners but will leave that for another day. Also, a serious discussion about handling reverses in competition needs to happen in every partnership.
I'd be happy to field any questions regarding this subject.
Happy bridging.
Isolde
It usually isn't long in a bridge journey before one becomes acquainted with the term "reverse". Hmmmm, I know this is a gear in my car, but what does it mean in terms of my bridge vocabulary.
I came across it this way. I had a very strong hand (two suiter) and opened it 1C. Partner bid 1S and I jump-shifted into hearts. When my dummy came down, a seasoned player said: "Isolde, you don't have to jump to show this hand". Thus, started my study of the "reverse" concept as it manifests itself in bridge bidding.
There are several (confusing) definitions of reverses but there are two which I like the best:
1) One reverses when one bids a higher ranking suit at the two level without a jump than one opened. Note, responder has only promised 6 points. Thus.....1C 1S, 2H is a reverse.
a) 1C 1H, 1S is not (second round of bidding does not start at the two level).
b)1D 1H, 2C is not (second suit is lower ranking than the first).
c) 1C 1D, 2H is not (note the jump)
2) One reverses when one asks responder to prefer the opened suit at the three level without a jump. Note, responder has only promised six points. If the bidding goes 1H 1N, 2S and responder prefers hearts, he/she has to do this at the three level. Thus, a reverse,
There are several musts about reverses and its best to practice them always:
1) Reverses show extra values. If you ask responder to pref the suit at the three level you should have combined resources to handle a contract at the three level. Reverse with a 13 point hand and responder owns only six--the pref at the three level will have to be played with 19 high card points between you. Not good. Have really good playing strength or at least 16 hcp as your extra values.
2) Reverses are shape-showing, that is the first suit is always longer than the second one --always. I had an opponent bid this hand 1C 1S, 2D against me this weekend. This hand was 4,A85,AQJT7,AK43. Note that diamonds are longer than clubs so this hand should have been shown through a strong jump shift, i.e. 1D 1S,3C.
3) One always promises one more bid after a reverse. Don't pass. (unless partnership agreements override this dictum).
There are many responder methods over reverses, some more standard than others. I have discussed them with most of my partners but will leave that for another day. Also, a serious discussion about handling reverses in competition needs to happen in every partnership.
I'd be happy to field any questions regarding this subject.
Happy bridging.
Isolde
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
