[Knurdler]

We play 15-17. At our club most couples revert to natural after any interference.
I would like advice about improving our agreement. We do not want to learn lebensohl. What we do now:

If they double, we ignore it and all systems on (2C = stayman, 3C = 10 points, puppet).
Redouble by us is currently not used. Suggestions?

If they bid 2C: our double = stayman and all systems on. We are happy with this for now.
If they bid 2D: our double = transfer to hearts. 3C = puppet, other systems on.
Should 3C be stayman or puppet?

If they bid 2H or higher: our double = penalty. Cue bid = unassigned. Other bids = natural.
The penalty double never seems to arise, suggestions for a better use of the double?
After 2H interference, if responder has 4S how should we bid?
Suggestions for cue bid?

Tks

[smerriman]

Knurdler, on 2025-March-28, 12:39, said:

I would like advice about improving our agreement. We do not want to learn lebensohl.

Out of interest, why not? It's not complicated, and is an improvement on what you're playing now. So not wanting to learn the most popular method seems contrary to wanting to improve what you're playing..

[pescetom]

smerriman, on 2025-March-28, 13:15, said:

Out of interest, why not? It's not complicated, and is an improvement on what you're playing now. So not wanting to learn the most popular method seems contrary to wanting to improve what you're playing..

I would suggest learning Rubensohl, which is even less complicated and (IMO) slightly more effective.
But both leave "natural" (which is not even that simple for partner) dead on the ground.

[akwoo]

This is the Beginner forum. Lebensohl (or Rubensohl) *is* complicated, especially if you play at a club full of beginners who almost never interfere over your 1N so you never use it and can't remember it.

I would suggest that:
1) double is takeout, showing 0-2 of their suit, 3+ of every other suit, not enough values for game, enough values to compete.
2) cue bid is game forcing stayman, showing 4 in an unbid major, forcing to game.
3) everything else is natural - drop dead at the 2 level and forcing at the 3 level

[smerriman]

akwoo, on 2025-March-28, 13:45, said:

This is the Beginner forum. Lebensohl (or Rubensohl) *is* complicated, especially if you play at a club full of beginners who almost never interfere over your 1N so you never use it and can't remember it.

Such players aren't playing 3♣ puppet over 2♦ or looking to improve their system over interference. They're playing double = they took my bid and I don't know what else to do (and don't want to know), which is arguably harder to play than lebensohl.

Of course, if the answer to 'why not' is that OP is finding what they're playing currently too hard to remember, rather than wanting something that works better, then fair enough.

[helene_t]

After they double, you can play redbl as a weak hand with one minor. Opener must bid 2♣.

"Natural" at the 3-level needs clarification: is it forcing? If you don't play any Sohl you probably need to play it as nonforcing (if it's not a jump), then the stronger hands with a long minor can cuebid. You will need to play dbl as t/o for this to work (otherwise the cuebid becomes overloaded) but that's ok.

[mycroft]

I suggest "half-Lebensohl" or "Lebensohl without lebensohl" to newer players looking for something better than stolen bid (which against aggressive overcallers quickly becomes "stolen auction" as they overcall on anything):

• Double is whatever you're comfortable with (penalty or takeout; I like takeout, but you need an agreement on when opener doubles back in for "protection")
  
• 2 bids are to play
  
• 3 bids are game forcing
  
• cuebid is Stayman, GF.
  
• 2NT can be whatever you want (INV with a stopper seems fine), as can 3NT.

You'll see a couple of holes in this system; when you're comfortable with it enough, put in the forcing puppet 2NT call, and watch a lot of them go away.

Transfer Lebensohl/Rubensohl is good - if both players remember, which many who don't play it regularly don't - but using the extra bids it gives you, plus being on the same page about "transfer to cuebid" (do you skip the suit and the cuebid is Stayman, or is it Stayman and the cuebid is a transfer?) is extra memory load.

The issue with any of this, including what you play now, is artificial bids:

• Double can be whatever, whether it's natural or conventional. I passed partner's "one minor or both majors" double just this week.
  
• 2♣ - if it's natural, do you want to ignore it still? (I say yes, for ease of memory).
  
• 2♦ showing either hearts or spades, or transfer overcalls, or Asp(t)ro/Meckwell style "clubs and another"/"diamonds and a major" need discussion. But they needed discussion playing stolen bid, too (you currently play double of 2♦ as hearts. But what if my 2♦ is hearts? What if it's "hearts or spades"?)
  
• Every artificial system has a bid for "both majors". How many do we have to promise before it's not a suit for you?

and others. Bridge is Hard; make some rules and follow them, even when they're stupid; if they're stupid often enough, change the rules (at the coffee shop, not at the bridge table).

[P_Marlowe]

Knurdler, on 2025-March-28, 12:39, said:

We play 15-17. At our club most couples revert to natural after any interference.
I would like advice about improving our agreement. We do not want to learn lebensohl. What we do now:

If they double, we ignore it and all systems on (2C = stayman, 3C = 10 points, puppet).
Redouble by us is currently not used. Suggestions?
<snip>

Power, suggesting to go for blood.

What I dont understand, given the agreement you wrote, why dont you want to learn Lebensohl, this seems
to be a lot simpler, than what you currently play.

[pescetom]

akwoo, on 2025-March-28, 13:45, said:

This is the Beginner forum. Lebensohl (or Rubensohl) *is* complicated, especially if you play at a club full of beginners who almost never interfere over your 1N so you never use it and can't remember it.

I would suggest that:
1) double is takeout, showing 0-2 of their suit, 3+ of every other suit, not enough values for game, enough values to compete.
2) cue bid is game forcing stayman, showing 4 in an unbid major, forcing to game.
3) everything else is natural - drop dead at the 2 level and forcing at the 3 level

That treatment makes sense, but is not different in principle from Rubensohl or transfer Lebensohl, nor any simpler to learn or play.
It has the significant disadvantage of lacking the flexibility of transfers at 3 level.

I regularly mentor beginners and I am very wary about introducing inessential/difficult conventions, such as minor suit transfers or even Blackwood.
But I long ago learned that it was easier to explain Rubensohl than "natural" and that they see it pay dividends from the start.

Of course the devil is in the detail of any convention, including Rubensohl, as mycroft spells out here. But they can cheerfully not worry about the meaning of opponents' 2 in a minor (and not ask) and still do better than most of the club.

[bluenikki]

Knurdler, on 2025-March-28, 12:39, said:

We play 15-17. At our club most couples revert to natural after any interference.
I would like advice about improving our agreement. We do not want to learn lebensohl. What we do now:

If they double, we ignore it and all systems on (2C = stayman, 3C = 10 points, puppet).
Redouble by us is currently not used. Suggestions?

If they bid 2C: our double = stayman and all systems on. We are happy with this for now.
If they bid 2D: our double = transfer to hearts. 3C = puppet, other systems on.
Should 3C be stayman or puppet?

If they bid 2H or higher: our double = penalty. Cue bid = unassigned. Other bids = natural.
The penalty double never seems to arise, suggestions for a better use of the double?
After 2H interference, if responder has 4S how should we bid?
Suggestions for cue bid?

Tks

If 2♣ shows majors, does double still show majors? If 2♦ shows hearts, does double still show hearts?

[Knurdler]

Thanks for the replies - I now think we should be using Rubensohl.

So my problem becomes which version of Rubensohl? And where to get a nice summary of it?

I have got Bob Crosby's summary of Kantar version modified.

[DavidKok]

I didn't immediately spot my favourite simple version of Rubensohl on the web - most of the sources I found differed in a bunch of the details from what I prefer. Bridgehands.com got somewhat close despite the error in the convention name, while others demand invitational(+) for the transfers (which I associate with Transfer Lebensohl, not Rubensohl). Here is a plain summary. As a word of warning, none of this is suitable for the Novice and Beginner forum:

• Bids at the 2-level are to play. Opener normally needs 4-card support to raise, and otherwise is not invited to act again.
  
• Bids starting with 2NT all the way through 3♥ are transfers to the next suit up. Normally they are unlimited, and can be weak. Opener will complete the transfer unless they have a superaccept, though with the exception of:
  
• If responder transfers to a suit at the 3-level that could have been shown at the 2-level (e.g. 1NT-(2♥)-3♥ showing spades, which could have been shown with 2♠) then obviously the transfer is invitational or stronger. Opener may now superaccept with any maximum with (4♠ or a 4m control bid) or without (3NT) fit, while completing the transfer shows a generic minimum.
  
• If responder transfers into a suit and then bids again, it is forcing to game and natural/descriptive. E.g. 1NT-(2♦)-2NT*-(P); 3♣*-(P)-3♥ shows a GF hand with 5(+)♣ and 4(+)♥.
  
• There are some special sequences: 1) Transfering into the opponents' suit; 2) Transfering and then bidding the opponents' suit; 3) Transfering and then bidding 3NT; 4) Bidding 3♠ ('transfer to 3NT)'; 5) Directly bidding 3NT. You may assign these any way you wish, people have a lot of suggestions for it. I have a mild preference for using some of these to ask for a 4cM and for some of these to be natural and/or COG, while others prefer to use this to show or deny stoppers.
  
• Lastly, some people prefer to transfer 'through' their suit rather than 'into' their suit, e.g. 1NT-(2♥)-3♦ showing spades. I think this is superior but slightly more complicated.

In practice, the transferohl and rubensohl versions I play have more bells and whistles. Realistically though, this is noticeable increase in complexity with only marginal gain. I don't recommend jumping into the deep end right away.
There are a lot of tradeoffs between different -ohl versions, and at some point I made a study of this and their relative merits. At the time I found possible arguments for playing up to five different versions of -ohl depending on the auction, before deciding that this is madness and we'll just pick one and live with it. If you are interested in the gains and losses of picking any particular variant, I'm very happy to chime in. Just keep in mind that most differences are likely to be small, and the main costs will be due to system mishaps and forgets. For that reason I think trying to keep things most straightforward is a good idea.

[mycroft]

Expect to forget. At least once. Try not to, but don't yell at partner when they do; and they won't when you do.

My experience, with the one partner that wanted to play it - the one time it came up, I bid 3♠ and partner raised to 4. At the end of the auction, I said "So, 3♠ is a transfer to 3NT. It's clear partner forgot. Having said that, so did I."

And we were playing about 20 pages of notes that (other than that one) neither of us forgot, and when we had played regularly, 5 years before, we played Transfer Precision, and basically never forgot anything in that either.

Having said that, it's another one where "once you forget, you probably never will again"...