[mw64ahw]

I'm looking at a number of approaches to bidding over Weak 2M openings with 6M.
I am interested in arriving at an optimal approach esp. w.r.t. SLEB/RLEB/ILEB, slow shows vs. slow denies vs. 4oM GF

1st Board - already a choice here?

---

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

you have a choice: do you want to force to game, or are you content to stay out.
This choice is not related to the form of Sohl variant you play.

If you decide to force to game, you will make a X, 2NT can be passed.
Obv. X can wrong side the 3NT contract, but at least you will play game.

If you decide to stay low, you have a choice, either X or 2NT, the variant of Sohl
can influence your choice.
The adv. of 2NT is, it showes the strength and the shape, but your stopper is pretty
thin, you may miss a 44 in spades.

I would force to game.

with kind regards
Marlowe

PS: In case it matters, we play reverse Lebensohl, which reduces the wrong sidening
of NT contracts, but it has other drawbacks.
I am not sure, if Reverse Lebensohl was part of your list of Sohl variants.

[mw64ahw]

P_Marlowe, on 2025-October-15, 09:34, said:

PS: In case it matters, we play reverse Lebensohl, which reduces the wrong sidening
of NT contracts, but it has other drawbacks.
I am not sure, if Reverse Lebensohl was part of your list of Sohl variants.

Thanks Marlowe - a plus for RLEB
Is 3♣ still weak in this case (i.e. 3/4 RLEB) or is there some other play (i.e. 2N becomes a GF with the exception of perhaps bidding the other Major ?)

[awm]

Double is clear of course. I prefer "regular" Lebensohl here, so if partner bids 2NT I will accept the 3♣ puppet, whereas if partner bids 3♣ or 3♦ I am forcing to game. FWIW I like the following continuations:

2NT...3♠ = invitational values with 4♠ and a heart card
Direct 3♠ = invitational values with 5♠, or with 4♠ and no heart card
3♥ = GF with two suits (often 4♠ and a longer minor) or slam try with 5+♠; no heart control
2NT...3♥ = GF with 4+♠ and a heart control
4m = natural slam try

[P_Marlowe]

mw64ahw, on 2025-October-15, 09:59, said:

Thanks Marlowe - a plus for RLEB
Is 3♣ still weak in this case (i.e. 3/4 RLEB) or is there some other play (i.e. 2N becomes a GF with the exception of perhaps bidding the other Major ?)

We play 3C as to play.

We try to keep it simple, the given seq. is not uncommon, but it does not come
up often either, ..., as always it depends on how much you play in a given partnership.

[mikeh]

awm, on 2025-October-15, 11:18, said:

Double is clear of course. I prefer "regular" Lebensohl here, so if partner bids 2NT I will accept the 3♣ puppet, whereas if partner bids 3♣ or 3♦ I am forcing to game. FWIW I like the following continuations:

2NT...3♠ = invitational values with 4♠ and a heart card
Direct 3♠ = invitational values with 5♠, or with 4♠ and no heart card
3♥ = GF with two suits (often 4♠ and a longer minor) or slam try with 5+♠; no heart control
2NT...3♥ = GF with 4+♠ and a heart control
4m = natural slam try

I prefer, after double (P):

2S less than invitational, may be weak, on a dreadful day 3=4=3=3) could be 3 spades but partner assumes 4
2N reg lebensohl
3m constructive, good 8+ hcp
3H generic gf, may be willing to pass 3N if partner bids it. Doesn’t promise or deny spades, but see
3S gf 4+ spades

2N then 3H is stayman with a stopper (so the lead is around to the stopper(s)
2N then 3S is invitational

4m as an advance if the double is game force


The problem is that we have more hand types possible than we can be sure of showing below 3N. In particular, we may have 4+ spades and anywhere from a bad hand to an invite to a force to game to a slam try.

The gf hands with 5+ spades and no slam interest are easy…bid 4S. If partner has a huge hand without adequate spades, he bids his suit over 4S but 95% or more of the time he’ll have 3+ spades for a double of 2H.

[mw64ahw]

Thanks all - I can already see a couple improvements I should perhaps make to current agreements.

A clear X on this occasion. Now Pass?

SLEB

---

RLEB

---

I've seen RLEB which maintains 2N-3♣ as weak; is this 3/4 RLEB?
I guess if 2N is ~9+ then you complete with 3♣ or force with 3♦+ 15+?

[awm]

mikeh, on 2025-October-15, 14:37, said:

I prefer, after double (P):

2S less than invitational, may be weak, on a dreadful day 3=4=3=3) could be 3 spades but partner assumes 4
2N reg lebensohl
3m constructive, good 8+ hcp
3H generic gf, may be willing to pass 3N if partner bids it. Doesn’t promise or deny spades, but see
3S gf 4+ spades

2N then 3H is stayman with a stopper (so the lead is around to the stopper(s)
2N then 3S is invitational

4m as an advance if the double is game force


The problem is that we have more hand types possible than we can be sure of showing below 3N. In particular, we may have 4+ spades and anywhere from a bad hand to an invite to a force to game to a slam try.

The gf hands with 5+ spades and no slam interest are easy…bid 4S. If partner has a huge hand without adequate spades, he bids his suit over 4S but 95% or more of the time he’ll have 3+ spades for a double of 2H.

I think we agree on most of this, except for the meaning of advancer's jump to 3♠ vs. 2NT...3♠. My reasoning here is that:

1. If we need to play in 3NT, it is most likely advancer who should declare and control the heart suit (doubler is usually short in hearts and even if he has a stopper may not be able to hold up sufficiently). Note that even if doubler has a heart stopper, the 2NT...3♠ sequence will wrong-side the contract.
2. Advancer's "constructive/invitational" hands will be more common than slam tries, and getting these hands to the right game could be important.
3. Advancer's sequences like 3♥ cue and 2NT..3♥ often (if not always) show spades, so there are potentially other ways to show a spade suit with GF+ hands.

[mw64ahw]

The full hand playing RLEB - may or may not get a 3♥ bid from the ops.

---

[mike777]

3D very borderline, however 3NT now easy over it.

[mw64ahw]

mike777, on 2025-October-16, 06:37, said:

3D very borderline, however 3NT now easy over it.

I've shown the reverse lebenshol bid so perhaps 3N is borderline

[mike777]

Very informative thread, ty for postings.