I also think it's fine to introduce Reversible as another ABC and carefully fit it into the existing hierarchy. It should be a one-trick pony and be another base class for Sequence; it should not have a default implementation. (But this has been beaten to death in other threads -- it's time to just file an issue with a patch.)
I think there's a lot of interesting stuff in this thread. Personally I don't think we should strive to distinguish between mappings and sequences structurally. We should instead continue to encourage inheriting from (or registering with) the corresponding ABCs. The goal is to ensure that there's one best-practice way to distinguish mappings from sequences, and it's by using isinstance(x, Sequence) or isinstance(x, Mapping).
If we want some way to turn something that just defines __getitem__ and __len__ into a proper sequence, it should just be made to inherit from Sequence, which supplies the default __iter__ and __reversed__. (Registration is *not* good enough here.) If we really want a way to turn something that just supports __getitem__ into an Iterable maybe we can provide an additional ABC for that purpose; let's call it a HalfSequence until we've come up with a better name. (We can't use Iterable for this because Iterable should not reference __getitem__.)