Software Changes Testing

PLEASE IGNORE — Just S/W Testing.

Ingberman

This is a bidding convention created by the university professor, mathematician Monroe Ingberman. It addresses a problem encountered after opener reverses.

Here are some examples of reverses by the opener:

If responder wants to take a preference to diamonds, she must bid 3♦. Similarly…

With the exception of the High Reverse, these generally show 16 – 21. They could be a bit stronger, but hands of 22 or more points start to fall into the range of hands that are opened 2♣ (or if reasonably balanced, 2NT or 2♣ depending on the HCP).

Normal reverses by opener are similar to jump-shifts by opener. The difference between the two being whether opener’s second, shorter suit is higher or lower ranking than her first-bid suit (“high reverses” being an exception — see below).

High Reverses

We also discussed something sometimes called a High Reverse. It fits our definition of a reverse by forcing responder, if she prefers opener’s first bid suit, to take a preference at the 3-level.

Here is an example:

Returning to opener’s first bid suit requires bidding it at the 3-level (3♠). This is known as a “High Reverse” because opener made the first 3-level bid.

The high reverse is a somewhat different kettle of fish, the reason being that responder has shown 10+ points by responding at the 2-level (to an opening bid of one of a suit). As with all reverses, it requires a good hand (we’ve said a “reverse” requires 16+). If you think about it, after a high reverse, the partnership’s combined hands should offer a play for game (as with all bridge situations, you can make up exceptions — this huge variety is part of the fun of the game).

Lebensohl Over Reverses

Responder’s one-level response only promises 6 or more points and some more aggressive pairs may well respond on 5. It could be a lot more if the hand is unsuitable for showing support for partner’s first-bid suit or for making a strong jump-shift (assuming you play strong jump-shifts by responder), but initially it only shows about 6-9.

What happens when responder has 6 and opener has 16 (a minimum facing a minimum)? The combined total is generally insufficient for game. How do we handle this situation? Well, we can make up some exceptions such as responder’s 2NT rebid or rebid of his own suit showing this or even taking a simple preference to opener’s first-bid suit. However, making all these exceptions makes constructive bidding difficult, especially since extra values by either hand (or both), can put one in the slam-zone.

Ingberman came up with the idea of using an artificial 2NT rebid by responder to indicate a minimum holding with doubts about game if opener has a minimum reverse. Like most conventions, something is lost by using the 2NT bid as conventional; however, using 2NT as some kind of wishy-washy negative or “natural minimum, non-forcing” is not much loss for a lot of gain.

Note that responder cannot pass the reverse, so must bid something. What we want to do is allow responder in an auction like the one below to distinguish between two hand types:

• a bid of 3♣  or 3♦ , all of which are non-jumps, which is minimum
• a bid of 3♣  or 3♦ , all of which are non-jumps, which has enough values to be game-forcing

What responder does, is to bid 2NT with the minimum hand. This requests opener to bid 3♣ (a “Puppet to 3♣“).

If opener does not bid 3♣, she shows enough values to want to be in game, even opposite an absolute minimum. In other words, not bidding 3♣ establishes a game-force. If, on the other hand, she bids 3♣, she shows a minimum and allows responder to set the contract. Let’s look at this in action:

• Pass — I wanted to stop in 3♣
• 3♦ — I wanted to stop in 3♦ (see the example hand below)
• 3♥ — I’ve got a lot of hearts and want to play here

Note: Some pairs might play that an initial response of 2♥  to East’s 1♣  opener shows a hand of this type. Clearly you cannot do this if you play strong jump-shifts.