What is a Reverse?

[Bertil]

The ACBL Encyclopedia (6 ed) defines a Reverse as :

"An unforced rebid at the the level of two or more in a
higher ranking suit than that bid originally"
Note the word 'unforced'.

But the new 7th Ed. does not mention Reverse
except for specific cases such as Reverse Drury.

In addition it's worth noting the ACBL definition of Free bid:
A bid made by a player whose partner's bid has been overcalled
by RHO.

Can anybody please explain these strange bids or lack thereof?

Stig
USA

[HoneyMonster]

"An unforced rebid at the the level of two or more in a higher ranking
suit than that bid originally"

Poor and inaccurate definition. The second suit need not be higher
ranking; 1S-2H-3C is a (high) reverse.

[Adam Beneschan]

Post by HoneyMonster

"An unforced rebid at the the level of two or more in a higher ranking
suit than that bid originally"

Poor and inaccurate definition. The second suit need not be higher
ranking; 1S-2H-3C is a (high) reverse.

I think the usage of that term is more common in England than in the US. Or at least historically it's been that way. (I think my old 4th edition Encyclopedia does mention this, but I don't have it front of me and can't check. Don't know whether the 6th edition refers to this at all.)

What I don't like about the definition is that if you take it literally, it means 1C-1H-2H is a reverse. If what Bertil quotes is the entire definition, then there's a lot of stuff implied that you're "just supposed" to know or assume, which makes this not a good definition. Then again, I'm more used to ANSI/ISO standards and other standards which are a lot more formal, so my definition of "definition" might not be the same as everyone else's.

-- Adam

[David Stevenson]

Post by Bertil
"An unforced rebid at the the level of two or more in a
higher ranking suit than that bid originally"
Note the word 'unforced'.
But the new 7th Ed. does not mention Reverse
except for specific cases such as Reverse Drury.

When a player bids two suits, and the second forces preference at the
three level, then it is a reverse. Most authorities say that a reverse
shows extra values.

1C 1H 1S
is not a reverse because responder can give preference to 2C
1C 1H 2D
is a reverse because responder cannot give preference to 2C
1D 1S 2C
is not a reverse because responder can give preference to 2D
1D 1S 2H
is a reverse because responder cannot give preference to 2D
1H 2C 2D
is not a reverse because responder can give preference to 2H
1H 2C 2S
is a reverse because responder cannot give preference to 2H

1C 1H 2C 2D
is not a reverse because opener can give preference to 2H
1C 1H 2C 2S
is a reverse because opener cannot give preference to 2H

Then there are the so-called High Reverses, where, despite the absence
of a jump, the second suit is bid at the 3-level.

1H 2D 3C
is a [high] reverse because responder cannot give preference to 2H

Post by Bertil
A bid made by a player whose partner's bid has been overcalled
by RHO.

A free bid is one where RHO has overcalled partner's action, thus the
player is not forced to bid.

2C (2H) 2S is free
Despite the strong opening, responder could pass since opener will get
another chance.

1C (1H) 1S is free
There is no need to keep the bidding opening very light since opener
will get another chance. Traditional authorities said you needed a lot
extra to make a free bid but the modern style is to bid on any suitable
hand.

[[e-mail]]

Post by David Stevenson
1C (1H) 1S is free
There is no need to keep the bidding opening very light since opener
will get another chance. Traditional authorities said you needed a lot
extra to make a free bid but the modern style is to bid on any suitable
hand.

Thought experiment: Your partner opens 1C and the next player passes. You respond 1S on xxxx with 6 hcp. The next player bids 4H, and your partner starts thinking. How do you feel? Nauseated, right?

But you pay off to this because jumps to 4H are rare, and you can't design your bidding system to handle freaks reliably.

But now suppose your RHO bids 1H over 1C instead of passing. Now there would be nothing surprising about a 4H bid by the 4th hand.

Carl

[f***@googlemail.com]

1C (1H) 1S is free > > There is no need to keep the bidding opening very light since opener > > will get another chance. Traditional authorities said you needed a lot > > extra to make a free bid but the modern style is to bid on any suitable > > hand. > > Thought experiment: Your partner opens 1C and the next player passes. You respond 1S on xxxx with 6 hcp. The next player bids 4H, and your partner starts thinking. How do you feel? Nauseated, right? But you pay off to this because jumps to 4H are rare, and you can't design your bidding system to handle freaks reliably. But now suppose your RHO bids 1H over 1C instead of passing. Now there would be nothing surprising about a 4H bid by the 4th hand. Carl

Well, two points:
First, David said the modern style is to bid on any suitable hand without needing a lot extra. He didn't define what a 'suitable hand' actually is. For example, I would show spades on KQxxx xxx xx xxx whether or not my RHO has overcalled 1H and this is the point: just because it's a "free bid" you don't need extra high cards; you bid because you have something positive you want to tell your partner about.

Second, although I wouldn't necessarily show spades with xxxx and a 6-count after a 1H overcall, I wouldn't necessarily be worried if partner bid 4S over 4H (although I might worry if he thought a long time before doing so). Consider:

xxxx
x
Qxxx
Kxxx

Axxx
xx
x
AQJxxx

I would be very happy to be in 4S after an opposing 4H bid on these two hands, even vulnerable against not.

[Charles Brenner]

1C (1H) 1S is free > > There is no need to keep the bidding opening very light since opener > > will get another chance. Traditional authorities said you needed a lot > > extra to make a free bid but the modern style is to bid on any suitable > > hand. > > Thought experiment: Your partner opens 1C and the next player passes. You respond 1S on xxxx with 6 hcp. The next player bids 4H, and your partner starts thinking. How do you feel? Nauseated, right? But you pay off to this because jumps to 4H are rare, and you can't design your bidding system to handle freaks reliably. But now suppose your RHO bids 1H over 1C instead of passing. Now there would be nothing surprising about a 4H bid by the 4th hand. Carl

First, David said the modern style is to bid on any suitable hand without needing a lot extra.  He didn't define what a 'suitable hand' actually is. For example, I would show spades on KQxxx xxx xx xxx whether or not my RHO has overcalled 1H and this is the point: just because it's a "free bid" you don't need extra high cards; you bid because you have something positive you want to tell your partner about.
xxxx
x
Qxxx
Kxxx
Axxx
xx
x
AQJxxx
I would be very happy to be in 4S after an opposing 4H bid on these two hands, even vulnerable against not.

Against 4Hx the defense started with heart, heart. I happily ruffed
and ducked a trump, planning to cash the trump Ace later and be down a
peaceful 200 against their +450. West won, returned a low diamond and
East continued a diamond, ruffed by dummy.

Now with both hands shortened I rethought my trump Ace idea. If I cash
it and someone shows out, the defense will be in a position to ruff
in, draw trumps and take the rest for 1400 away (assuming I grab a 2nd
diamond ruff as damage control).

Shaken by that prospect I instead started playing clubs. East ruffed
in from original 2551 distribution, forced the dummy with a 3rd
diamond, and I was at the crossroads again. Now what? If trump ace and
all follow, I have the rest for -200 as planned. Maybe I should have
smelled the rat but that's what I did. West now ruffed the 4th club
and the dummy was dead, so I lost another diamond. Down 800.

Charles

[Charles Brenner]

Post by f***@googlemail.com
I would be very happy to be in 4S after an opposing 4H bid on these two hands, even vulnerable against not.

Against 4Hx the defense started with heart ...

Sorry, I meant I was in 4Sx.

[Bertil]

Post by David Stevenson

Post by Bertil
"An unforced rebid at the the level of two or more in a
higher ranking suit than that bid originally"
Note the word 'unforced'.
But the new 7th Ed. does not mention Reverse
except for specific cases such as Reverse Drury.

When a player bids two suits, and the second forces preference at the
three level, then it is a reverse. Most authorities say that a reverse
shows extra values.
1C 1H 1S
is not a reverse because responder can give preference to 2C
1C 1H 2D
is a reverse because responder cannot give preference to 2C
1D 1S 2C
is not a reverse because responder can give preference to 2D
1D 1S 2H
is a reverse because responder cannot give preference to 2D
1H 2C 2D
is not a reverse because responder can give preference to 2H
1H 2C 2S
is a reverse because responder cannot give preference to 2H
1C 1H 2C 2D
is not a reverse because opener can give preference to 2H
1C 1H 2C 2S
is a reverse because opener cannot give preference to 2H
Then there are the so-called High Reverses, where, despite the absence
of a jump, the second suit is bid at the 3-level.
1H 2D 3C
is a [high] reverse because responder cannot give preference to 2H

It looks like another definitiion by ACBL in the glossary to "Commonly
used Conventions" would cover all of your examples, viz,
A rebid of a new suit that prevents responder from returning to opener's

original suit at the two level.

Stig

Post by David Stevenson

Post by Bertil
A bid made by a player whose partner's bid has been overcalled
by RHO.

A free bid is one where RHO has overcalled partner's action, thus the
player is not forced to bid.
2C (2H) 2S is free
Despite the strong opening, responder could pass since opener will get
another chance.
1C (1H) 1S is free
There is no need to keep the bidding opening very light since opener
will get another chance. Traditional authorities said you needed a lot
extra to make a free bid but the modern style is to bid on any suitable
hand.
--
David Stevenson Bridge RTFLB Cats Railways
Liverpool, England, UK bluejak on BBO Mbl: [phone]
bluejak666 on Skype Bridgepage: http://blakjak.org/brg_menu.htm

[b***@gmail.com]

Post by Bertil

Post by David Stevenson

Post by Bertil
"An unforced rebid at the the level of two or more in a
higher ranking suit than that bid originally"
Note the word 'unforced'.
But the new 7th Ed. does not mention Reverse
except for specific cases such as Reverse Drury.

When a player bids two suits, and the second forces preference at the
three level, then it is a reverse. Most authorities say that a reverse
shows extra values.
1C 1H 1S
is not a reverse because responder can give preference to 2C
1C 1H 2D
is a reverse because responder cannot give preference to 2C
1D 1S 2C
is not a reverse because responder can give preference to 2D
1D 1S 2H
is a reverse because responder cannot give preference to 2D
1H 2C 2D
is not a reverse because responder can give preference to 2H
1H 2C 2S
is a reverse because responder cannot give preference to 2H
1C 1H 2C 2D
is not a reverse because opener can give preference to 2H
1C 1H 2C 2S
is a reverse because opener cannot give preference to 2H
Then there are the so-called High Reverses, where, despite the absence
of a jump, the second suit is bid at the 3-level.
1H 2D 3C
is a [high] reverse because responder cannot give preference to 2H

It looks like another definitiion by ACBL in the glossary to "Commonly
used Conventions" would cover all of your examples, viz,
A rebid of a new suit that prevents responder from returning to opener's
original suit at the two level.
Stig

Post by David Stevenson

Post by Bertil
A bid made by a player whose partner's bid has been overcalled
by RHO.

A free bid is one where RHO has overcalled partner's action, thus the
player is not forced to bid.
2C (2H) 2S is free
Despite the strong opening, responder could pass since opener will get
another chance.
1C (1H) 1S is free
There is no need to keep the bidding opening very light since opener
will get another chance. Traditional authorities said you needed a lot
extra to make a free bid but the modern style is to bid on any suitable
hand.
--
David Stevenson Bridge RTFLB Cats Railways
Liverpool, England, UK bluejak on BBO Mbl: [phone]
bluejak666 on Skype Bridgepage: http://blakjak.org/brg_menu.htm

Two very good articles on reverses are available on the web, Stig. Go to Karen's Bridge Library (http://home.comcast.net/~kwbridge/) or BridgeHands.com to search for the articles.

[David Stevenson]

Post by Bertil

Post by David Stevenson

Post by Bertil
"An unforced rebid at the the level of two or more in a
higher ranking suit than that bid originally"
Note the word 'unforced'.
But the new 7th Ed. does not mention Reverse
except for specific cases such as Reverse Drury.

When a player bids two suits, and the second forces preference at the
three level, then it is a reverse. Most authorities say that a reverse
shows extra values.
1C 1H 1S
is not a reverse because responder can give preference to 2C
1C 1H 2D
is a reverse because responder cannot give preference to 2C
1D 1S 2C
is not a reverse because responder can give preference to 2D
1D 1S 2H
is a reverse because responder cannot give preference to 2D
1H 2C 2D
is not a reverse because responder can give preference to 2H
1H 2C 2S
is a reverse because responder cannot give preference to 2H
1C 1H 2C 2D
is not a reverse because opener can give preference to 2H
1C 1H 2C 2S
is a reverse because opener cannot give preference to 2H
Then there are the so-called High Reverses, where, despite the absence
of a jump, the second suit is bid at the 3-level.
1H 2D 3C
is a [high] reverse because responder cannot give preference to 2H

It looks like another definitiion by ACBL in the glossary to "Commonly
used Conventions" would cover all of your examples, viz,
A rebid of a new suit that prevents responder from returning to opener's
original suit at the two level.

Which do you want, an explanation so you and others can understand
what a reverse is, or another glib definition that people will
misunderstand?

Why do you think so many people misunderstand reverses or get the
principle wrong? Easy: because they have been taught a rule or a
definition, rather than have it explained to them.

In England we have a lot of problems with players misunderstanding the
concept of strong openings. English players are taught some silly rule
about strong hands being ones with eight playing tricks, without having
the concepts actually explained to them, so they open a strong opening
with

x
x
x
QJT9xxxxxx

because it has eight playing tricks.

[Steve Willner]

Post by Bertil
"An unforced rebid at the the level of two or more in a
higher ranking suit than that bid originally"

Good grief! As others have written, this is not what people normall
mean. TBW glossary
http://bridgeworld.com/default.asp?d=bridge_glossary&f=glossa.html
gives:
"a non-jump bid in a new suit that bypasses a bid in a lower-ranking
suit already bid by the same player. [North one club, South one spade,
North two hearts is a reverse (bypasses two clubs). But North one club,
South one heart, North one spade is not (no bypass).]."

This is what most people mean. I think "bypass" and "new suit" are the
key points.

Post by Bertil
But the new 7th Ed. does not mention Reverse
except for specific cases such as Reverse Drury.

Which has nothing to do with "reverse" as defined above. Are you sure
the definition isn't there under a different heading?

Post by Bertil
A bid made by a player whose partner's bid has been overcalled
by RHO.

Meaning that a bid by responder over a takeout double is not a free
bid?! Bizarre. Let's check TBW again:
"a bid made when it is not necessary to bid to allow partner another
chance to call."

Seems right to me.

[Charles Brenner]

Post by Bertil
"An unforced rebid at the the level of two or more in a
higher ranking suit than that bid originally"

Good grief!  As others have written, this is not what people normall
mean.  TBW glossaryhttp://bridgeworld.com/default.asp?d=bridge_glossary&f=glossa.html
"a non-jump bid in a new suit that bypasses a bid in a lower-ranking
suit already bid by the same player. [North one club, South one spade,
North two hearts is a reverse (bypasses two clubs). But North one club,
South one heart, North one spade is not (no bypass).]."
This is what most people mean.  I think "bypass" and "new suit" are the
key points.

Not surprisingly the definition is the best one yet given. Some other
suggestions specifically referred to bypassing at the two level --
that's too restrictive, as surely 1C (1S) 2H (p) 3D is a reverse, and
for that matter so is 1H (5C) p (p) 5S.

I agree with Steve as to what the key points are but the BW definition
slightly surprises me in one respect: my issue is with the "non-jump"
stipulation. In the sequence 1H (p) 1NT (p) 3S, the last bid is
sometimes referred to as a jump reverse which to my ears makes it a
fortiori a reverse. If you open 1H and later majestically jump to 6S,
that's also a reverse isn't it?

Charles

[f***@googlemail.com]

my issue is with the "non-jump" stipulation. In the sequence 1H (p) 1NT (p) 3S, the last bid is sometimes referred to as a jump reverse which to my ears makes it a fortiori a reverse. If you open 1H and later majestically jump to 6S, that's also a reverse isn't it? Charles


- I wouldn't call that a 'jump reverse'.
Obviously this is a piece of technical jargon and the word means whatever one defines it to mean, but to me a reverse is also a natural bid (more or less). I also wouldn't call 1H P 2D P 3S (splinter) a 'reverse', jump or otherwise.

[Co Wiersma]

Post by f***@googlemail.com
my issue is with the "non-jump" stipulation. In the sequence 1H (p) 1NT (p) 3S, the last bid is sometimes referred to as a jump reverse which to my ears makes it a fortiori a reverse. If you open 1H and later majestically jump to 6S, that's also a reverse isn't it? Charles
- I wouldn't call that a 'jump reverse'.
Obviously this is a piece of technical jargon and the word means whatever one defines it to mean, but to me a reverse is also a natural bid (more or less). I also wouldn't call 1H P 2D P 3S (splinter) a 'reverse', jump or otherwise.

What is wrong with "jump reverse"?
It seems like a clear description to me.
As long as we do not confuse it with a normal reverse..

[Adam Beneschan]

Post by f***@googlemail.com
my issue is with the "non-jump" stipulation. In the sequence 1H (p) 1NT (p) 3S, the last bid is sometimes referred to as a jump reverse which to my ears makes it a fortiori a reverse. If you open 1H and later majestically jump to 6S, that's also a reverse isn't it? Charles
- I wouldn't call that a 'jump reverse'.
Obviously this is a piece of technical jargon and the word means whatever one defines it to mean, but to me a reverse is also a natural bid (more or less). I also wouldn't call 1H P 2D P 3S (splinter) a 'reverse', jump or otherwise.

It depends on context, I suppose. If I were reading an article and the author said "So-and-so made a jump reverse" without any other explanation, I think I'd assume it was natural. But when discussing methods with another player or writing system notes, it seems fine to me to write something like "jump reverse = splinter".

-- Adam

[Steve Willner]

the BW definition slightly surprises me in one respect: my issue is
with the "non-jump" stipulation.

I agree with that. TBW defines what I'd call a "simple reverse," with
the general term "reverse" including both that and jump reverses.
Anyway something about "new suit" and "bypassing."

To Frances: in general, TBW is careful to distinguish words that
describe an auction from words that describe what the calls mean. In
that approach, "reverse" refers to a bidding sequence regardless of what
the bids actually show. Similarly, I'd still use "jump reverse" to mean
a sequence of bids even if the meaning is splinter or something else
artificial. And in the other direction, I'd use "splinter" for any bid
that shows shortness, even if the bid isn't a jump or a new suit. As we
all know, not everyone follows this approach. Some will say, for
example, "1H-2C-2S is not a reverse," when what they mean (in my
language) is that it doesn't show extra values. And Adam's "A jump
reverse is a splinter" makes perfect sense to me.

[David Stevenson]

Post by Steve Willner

the BW definition slightly surprises me in one respect: my issue is
with the "non-jump" stipulation.

I agree with that. TBW defines what I'd call a "simple reverse," with
the general term "reverse" including both that and jump reverses.
Anyway something about "new suit" and "bypassing."
To Frances: in general, TBW is careful to distinguish words that
describe an auction from words that describe what the calls mean. In
that approach, "reverse" refers to a bidding sequence regardless of
what the bids actually show. Similarly, I'd still use "jump reverse"
to mean a sequence of bids even if the meaning is splinter or something
else artificial. And in the other direction, I'd use "splinter" for
any bid that shows shortness, even if the bid isn't a jump or a new
suit. As we all know, not everyone follows this approach. Some will
say, for example, "1H-2C-2S is not a reverse," when what they mean (in
my language) is that it doesn't show extra values. And Adam's "A jump
reverse is a splinter" makes perfect sense to me.

Not only do I play a jump reverse as a splinter, but I tell people so.
:)

[Barry Margolin]

Post by Bertil
"An unforced rebid at the the level of two or more in a
higher ranking suit than that bid originally"
Note the word 'unforced'.
But the new 7th Ed. does not mention Reverse
except for specific cases such as Reverse Drury.

It's on the Encyclopedia CD, page 228, in the section on Bidding.

"An unforced rebid at the level of two or more in a higher-ranking suit
than that bid originally ­ usually a strength- showing bid. The English
definition of a reverse by opener is slightly wider in scope: a bid of a
suit in an uncontested auction that prevents responder from returning to
the original suit
at the level of two. This allows for the situation described in England
as a high reverse."

The rest of the description is almost identical to the 5th Edition (I
skipped 6). The only significant difference is a new paragraph at the
end saying that the reverse may not be as strong in some contested
auctions.

If you think something is missing from the new Encyclopedia, it's almost
certainly on the CDs.

[Bertil]

Post by Barry Margolin

Post by Bertil
"An unforced rebid at the the level of two or more in a
higher ranking suit than that bid originally"
Note the word 'unforced'.
But the new 7th Ed. does not mention Reverse
except for specific cases such as Reverse Drury.

It's on the Encyclopedia CD, page 228, in the section on Bidding.
"An unforced rebid at the level of two or more in a higher-ranking suit
than that bid originally ­ usually a strength- showing bid. The English
definition of a reverse by opener is slightly wider in scope: a bid of a
suit in an uncontested auction that prevents responder from returning to
the original suit
at the level of two. This allows for the situation described in England
as a high reverse."
The rest of the description is almost identical to the 5th Edition (I
skipped 6). The only significant difference is a new paragraph at the
end saying that the reverse may not be as strong in some contested
auctions.
If you think something is missing from the new Encyclopedia, it's almost
certainly on the CDs.
--
Barry Margolin
Arlington, MA

I assume you are refering to the CD about Bridge Conventions.
My public library does not have it, nor does most libraries.
Thus one must buy both Encyclopedias.

Back on Jan.9 I posted about teaching 25 conventions and we were
informed by David F and David S that Reverse is not a convention.

It would seem that ACBL needs a better Editorial policy.

Stig

[Barry Margolin]

Post by Bertil
I assume you are refering to the CD about Bridge Conventions.
My public library does not have it, nor does most libraries.
Thus one must buy both Encyclopedias.

I'm talking about the two CDs that came packaged with the 7th Edition of
the Bridge Encyclopedia. A huge amount of material was moved from the
printed book into these CDs. The Introduction explains this.

[Michael Angelo Ravera]

"An unforced rebid at the the level of two or more in a higher ranking suit than that bid originally"
Note the word 'unforced'. But the new 7th Ed. does not mention Reverse except for specific cases such as Reverse Drury. In addition it's worth noting the ACBL definition of
Free bid: A bid made by a player whose partner's bid has been overcalled by RHO.
Can anybody please explain these strange bids or lack thereof?
Stig USA

A "Reverse" is a non-jump bid by Opener that (in a natural sequence) requires partner to bid at the 3-level in order to give simple preference to the suit Opened. We can talk about a "Responder Reverse" in similar terms, but occasionally 4-level action by Opener may be required (and often conventions like "Checkback (New Minor Forcing)" and Fourth Suit "Forcing".

A "free bid" is a bid that is made when not necessary to give your partner another chance to bid. Basically, if your RHO has doubled, redoubled, or bid, you have a "free bid". The term is usually confined to the first round of bidding and usually then to the Responder over an overcall (or takeout double) or Advancer after a Response (or negative double). It is often the case that you'd like to have the person make the "free bid" only when they have some piece of information that they would like to convey (that doesn't necessarily mean constructive".