[cnszsun]

I had this bidding sequence today, but not sure what's the common understanding.

1♣-(ps)-1♥-(2♦);
2♠-

Is 2♠ a reverse bid, or slight extra or just distributional, or no extra needed, 4♠s enough?

[Gerben42]

It should show reverse strength, there is a REASON a reverse needs that strength: You force partner on the 3-level to support your first suit. Same reason here.

[kenrexford]

There are a few other factors that suggest strength, beyond simply forcing the three-level to return to clubs. That issue (forcing the three level) is not usually compelling "proof" for many people, because we force this decision all the time with extremely meager values in competitive auctions.

One additional reason is that the already-announced strength protects partner in pass-out seat to be aggressive. This direct action is not as necessary as a traditional obar or similar competitive action by a person who has not yet shown anything. It is more akin to doubling again or bidding again not in pass-out seat after having already made a takeout double.

Second, for some, the double might be of a negative variety. If you do not play support doubl4es, or if this auction merits that the double show spades instead, then 2♠ necessarily shows extras. That is probably a minority view.

The third is a philosophical one. The general philosophy seems to be that the opening side often defaults to protection of strength-showing actions in competitive auctions to protect game-seeking integrity against preemption and interference, whereas the overcalling side defaults to interference and competition without as much concern dedicated to game exploration. Thus, the default seems to be for Opener to favor the nature of 2♠ as strong to facilitate game searches rather than allowing a patterning out for maximizing competitive aspects of the auction.

Of course, I may be wrong in all this, as I often do not get or know conventional wisdom.

[jtfanclub]

cnszsun, on Feb 23 2007, 09:03 AM, said:

I had this bidding sequence today, but not sure what's the common understanding.

1♣-(ps)-1♥-(2♦);
2♠-

Is 2♠ a reverse bid, or slight extra or just distributional, or no extra needed, 4♠s enough?

If X would be a support double, I don't see how 2♠ can show bona-fide reverse strength. Lots of hands without hearts won't have a better bid. It should show exactly 4 spades, and, I dunno, 14+ hcp or so.

Now I'll get told that no sober expert would bid 2♠ with:

AKxx
x
xxx
AKxxx

It won't be the first time.

[HeartA]

jtfanclub, on Feb 23 2007, 10:06 AM, said:

If X would be a support double, I don't see how 2♠ can show bona-fide reverse strength. Lots of hands without hearts won't have a better bid. It should show exactly 4 spades, and, I dunno, 14+ hcp or so.

Now I'll get told that no sober expert would bid 2♠ with:

AKxx
x
xxx
AKxxx

It won't be the first time.

Even with your perfect 14 count and good shape, it's still not qualified for 2S rebid. 2S at this position has to be a reverse. pd still has the chance to bid, doesn't he?

[the hog]

Still a reverse. If playing support Xs you can pass with a min hand. Pd is always there to reopen.

[jtfanclub]

HeartA, on Feb 24 2007, 03:09 AM, said:

Even with your perfect 14 count and good shape, it's still not qualified for 2S rebid. 2S at this position has to be a reverse. pd still has the chance to bid, doesn't he?

It would have to be a heck of a 14 count. But my point was, the range for your opener was so wide that I don't think you can afford to wait for partner to reopen if you're in the middle range.

[pclayton]

Its a reverse and its forcing. 3♠ would be a splinter.

Weaker hands with 4♠ just pass and bid spades after pard's balance.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

depends on agreements, it should show distribution,
i.e. 5-4 and add. strength, but his does not necessarily
mean 2S is forcing.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[han]

jtfanclub, on Feb 23 2007, 10:06 AM, said:

Now I'll get told that no sober expert would bid 2♠ with:

AKxx
x
xxx
AKxxx

It won't be the first time.

You are right, no sober expert would do that.

[whereagles]

I disagree with that. 2♠ is a perfectly viable bid, though a tad risky due to the danger of misfit.

[helene_t]

Quote

Now I'll get told that no sober expert would bid 2♠ with:

AKxx
x
xxx
AKxxx

A lot of experts would do just that (not sure how sobber they are, though). THe discussion was in IMPs (Dutch magazine for experts) Forum a couple of years ago. Several panel members thought that a reverse in competition should be based on O/D ratio rather than overall strength.

[Fluffy]

I would be more worried to pass with KQJxxx and KQxx than AKxxx AKxx

[jdonn]

It shows a reverse, if 2♠ could be on a minimum then how would extra strength be shown? On the AKxx x xxx AKxxx 2♠ would clearly be an overbid, but not a huge one considering the nature of the "14 points", and I have to admit it could strike gold if partner is pretty weak with 4 spades. Of course it's still a bad bid since partner bidding 3NT or 3/4♥ or just being something like a weak 2542 could be a disaster, but I'm not so stubborn as to admit it couldn't work.