[smerriman]

---

You are playing the standard reverse system described by mikeh in the primer on reverse bidding.

2♠ is a 1 round force, and could be made with a dead minimum with 5 spades, or game forcing hands.

Does it deny the ability to make a positive raise of one of opener's suits?

Ie, would you bid 2♠ here, or 3♣? Which one gets this type of hand across better?

In the primer, mikeh had a good 5 spade suit and 3 card minor support, and chose the club raise, and I've always assumed 2♠ would deny the ability to do so. But now I'm not sure, since if opener makes a nonforcing response of 2NT or 3♣ over 2♠, you can still bid clubs as a GF. But would opener take this as preference rather than a real club suit? Conversely, if you bid 3♣, are you going to be able to describe your spades accurately later?

(If you consider this not good enough to make a 3♣ bid, add an extra jack or whatever.)

[FelicityR]

Bidding is not a precise science, as we all know. Partner has shown 5-4 distribution in the minors or better. The chances of him having a better fit in ♠s is more remote. I've always been advised by expert players far better than myself to confirm a fit at the earliest opportunity. That ♠ suit is very nice, but I would bid 3♣ now. Rebidding ♠s, and then bidding ♣s later will always come over as preference as opposed to a genuine fit.

[KingCovert]

From my perspective, I think 2♠ is clear. I'd consider it mandatory, but, I can appreciate how others might differ.

While I do agree with Felicity that agreeing a fit is important, I don't really see this as one of those auctions. While rebidding spades doesn't promise 6+♠, it's highly suggestive of it. And, it's a guarantee if you ever agree clubs later if partner doesn't happen to support your spades. Knowing that you have 6♠ might be the difference between a part score and game, or game and slam, in clubs.

So, while Mikeh would bid 3♣ with only 5♠ and a known 8+card fit in ♣, I think that changes when you actually have a truly rebiddable suit. And, this is about as rebiddable as a suit can get.

I'm not just willing, but happy to play 4♠ in a 6-1 fit over 3NT. There are so many ways that 3NT is going down when I have no entries to cash this spade suit. And, I will take a spade slam over a club slam every day of the week with this holding when partner has big values and 2 card support. It's not even close.

To illustrate the value of this hand, if partner had something like:

---

then this hand would be making slam on a spade finesse and a non-heart lead. And, that's not enough value for a reverse. And there's no reason to suppose that partner has a minimum when opponents are silent. It's clear to you that they have a stack of hearts, and they aren't bidding.

Why are spades maybe better than clubs? Because partner's club suit might be rather poor, AXXXX♣ with some pretty solid diamonds for you to pitch your club losers on is still a good situation.

Sometimes clubs will be right, but, you don't lose the ability to agree clubs later. I disagree on this point, I think 5♣ as your next bid clearly shows minimum-ish values and much better than suit preference over whatever partner bids.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

in the given seq. you have the option of 2H as some kind of FSF.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mikeh]

With the given hand, I would always rebid 2S. The clubs can wait.

With 5=3 in the blacks, I would always bid 3C (forcing), because opener, with the possible 3=1=4=5 type hand, will now bid 3S, getting us back to that fit. But with this spade suit, I hardly need 3 card support for it to be adequate. Note that partner won't know that my spades are remotely this good but, unless he raises spades, I intend to show club support next. By stressing spades when I later support clubs, I imply longer spades than a mere 5 card suit.

While this may sound as if I am adopting KingCovert's suggestions, the idea of reversing with is example hand is, imo, not a good one.

Yes, he can be 2=2=4=5, but with many 15-16 counts, he should open 1N (if playing strong 1N) and if too weak for that, rebid 1N....reversing is a terrible overbid.

Also, 1=3=4=5 17 counts may or may not choose to reverse, depending on the quality of the hand. A stiff in partner's suit is not a good sign and should suggest caution. On the other hand, 3=1=4=5 should upgrade.

[KingCovert]

mikeh, on 2019-December-09, 13:45, said:

While this may sound as if I am adopting KingCovert's suggestions, the idea of reversing with is example hand is, imo, not a good one.

Yes, he can be 2=2=4=5, but with many 15-16 counts, he should open 1N (if playing strong 1N) and if too weak for that, rebid 1N....reversing is a terrible overbid.

Well, to be fair, I was just describing how a hand that reverses in the given sequence, with fit for your spades, can have really good play for 6 even with a sub-minimum for the sequence.

I certainly wasn't suggesting that the hand that I provided should reverse, and wasn't even addressing whether some 2245/2254 hands should open 1NT.

Dont see how this hurts the point though, since your points now combine to say that this sequence should show such a good hand when partner can support spades that playing small slam is borderline mandatory now.

Dont take this the wrong way Mikeh, but very often you disagree even when you agree. You often bring straw men into discussions such as this so that you can contribute something more than "I agree" and a plus reputation.

Edit: I'll remove the overdramatic nonsense! lol... Can you imagine something more overdramatic than the previous paragraph?

[mikeh]

KingCovert, on 2019-December-09, 15:52, said:

Well, to be fair, I was just describing how a hand that reverses in the given sequence, with fit for your spades, can have really good play for 6 even with a sub-minimum for the sequence.

I certainly wasn't suggesting that the hand that I provided should reverse, and wasn't even addressing whether some 2245/2254 hands should open 1NT.

Dont see how this hurts the point though, since your points now combine to say that this sequence should show such a good hand when partner can support spades that playing small slam is borderline mandatory now.

Dont take this the wrong way Mikeh, but very often you disagree even when you agree. You often bring straw men into discussions such as this so that you can contribute something more than "I agree" and a plus reputation.

You've said nothing that didn't align exactly with what I said. Only commenting on things I didn't address. Just comment on them without feeling the need to argue needlessly. It's immature.

I overlooked that part of your post where you said that the hand you gave was not enough to reverse, so I misunderstood you. Please accept my apology: although I feel compelled to suggest that the reason I overlooked it was not immaturity, but more likely, given my age, over-maturity

[KingCovert]

mikeh, on 2019-December-09, 18:09, said:

I overlooked that part of your post where you said that the hand you gave was not enough to reverse, so I misunderstood you. Please accept my apology: although I feel compelled to suggest that the reason I overlooked it was not immaturity, but more likely, given my age, over-maturity

Fair enough, I'm sorry for the dramatic nature of the post. But, we always seem to have these disagreements while agreeing. No doubt you know what you're talking about, which is why I always find these immaterial disagreements sort of confounding... I guess there's only so much time in the day and none of us have enough time to dedicate to ensure that every post is perfect. I'll raise my hand to committing that mistake on a near daily basis.

[Zelandakh]

To me it is also clear to rebid 2♠ on that hand as long as we are playing a method where that is forcing. If you have difficulty in differentiating between 5 and 6 card spade suits using standard methods then a decent alternative if you have an accomodating partner comes in the form of transfer rebids. For example:-

1♣ - 1♠; 2♦
==
2♥ = to play 2♠ or GF with 6+ spades
2♠ = GF with precisely 5 spades
2NT = to play 3♣ or GF agreeing clubs
3♣ = to play 3♦ or GF agreeing diamonds
--

And similarly for the more crowded auction:
1♦ - 1♠; 2♥
==
2♠ = to play
2NT = GF with precisely 5 spades
3♣ = to play 3♦ or GF agreeing diamonds
3♦ = to play 3♥ or GF agreeing hearts
3♥ = GF with 6+ spades
--

In the end though there is no substitution for practice. Reverse auctions are relatively rare and tend to cause difficulty without firm agreements. A partnership bidding room on BBO is a useful way of fleshing out those agreements if you have a regular partner interested in that.