[thepossum]

Dear all

On the brink of actually winning an individual tourney and this hand comes up. One bad bid and I end up in 6Sx instead of 4S. On top of that, my play isnt good enough to make the 5Sx that somebody made and I lose 15 IMPS on one hand when I would have been up 12 IMPs for 8 hands. How you need to be on your game at every bid. There is no escape from this. I tried to get GIB to stop but there is no way so 6Sx was what it ended up. Could have been 1 down with good play but ..... One inaccurate bid Just as well I made up for it with one game nobody else made but sad to ruin your great tops with terrible boottoms Best bid was probably 4S preempt but should have got to 4S other ways

---

[The_Badger]

The 4♠ pre-emptive opening bid is the worse bid to arrive in this contract. I readily admit I don't play with the robots, but I prefer a rebid in ♠s to introducing the ♥ suit on the second turn.

However, that's the problem with the nebulous 1NT in 2/1. Partner could well have a ♥ fit. Though with the three top honours in the suit, and three cards longer, I would prioritise ♠s as the rebid here.

[thepossum]

 The_Badger, on 2018-October-31, 21:33, said:

The 4♠ pre-emptive opening bid is the worse bid to arrive in this contract. I readily admit I don't play with the robots, but I prefer a rebid in ♠s to introducing the ♥ suit on the second turn.

However, that's the problem with the nebulous 1NT in 2/1. Partner could well have a ♥ fit. Though with the three top honours in the suit, and three cards longer, I would prioritise ♠s as the rebid here.

Thanks Badger. It was a series of compounded errors so partner thought I had slam values. If I had jumped to 4S instead of bidding 3S maybe I could have escaped

[johnu]

This probably belongs in the GIB Robot forum. The description of 4♣ is one of those off the wall fantasy bids that GIB makes all too frequently. 3 hearts or less, 1 spade or less. Why is GIB introducing a new suit at the 4 level and denying a spade fit when there is a "known" 8 card spade fit?

I don't know what GIB would do if you pass 4♣X, but it seems like pass would be a likely action.

[pescetom]

 The_Badger, on 2018-October-31, 21:33, said:

I readily admit I don't play with the robots, but I prefer a rebid in ♠s to introducing the ♥ suit on the second turn.

However, that's the problem with the nebulous 1NT in 2/1. Partner could well have a ♥ fit. Though with the three top honours in the suit, and three cards longer, I would prioritise ♠s as the rebid here.

The problem here isn't with 2/1 (a hearts fit will emerge fine) but with GIB's crazy interpretation of it: as @johnu points out. South shows 6-card spades and North instead of gratefully bidding 4S starts waffling about clubs.

[Cyberyeti]

N's 6♥ bid is a bit odd, I don't know the robot system, but redoubling 4♠ would be my human reaction at which point decent defence will get you 800 out of 5♦ or more in 4♠xx.

Making 5♠ is routine without a trump lead at trick 1, you must ruff your second diamond before playing a second trump.

[The_Badger]

 pescetom, on 2018-November-01, 08:18, said:

The problem here isn't with 2/1 (a hearts fit will emerge fine) but with GIB's crazy interpretation of it: as @johnu points out. South shows 6-card spades and North instead of gratefully bidding 4S starts waffling about clubs.

Agree. The robot's bidding is crazy, though technically I feel 2♠ is a better call than 2♥ on the second round. With so many cards missing in the minors, the likelihood is that partner is more minor -orientated than has ♥ support. though obviously he could have ♥s.

I must admit a degree of bias here as I have said previously I'm not a great fan of the nebulous 1NT in 2/1. If the E/W robots had bid at the Level of Total Tricks immediately to 4♦, you have no way knowing whether the 1NT response has been bid on a good or bad hand. With SAYC partner would have bid 2♣, and whilst that bid doesn't improve your hand, you at least know he has 10+ points somewhere.

[pescetom]

 The_Badger, on 2018-November-01, 11:13, said:

I must admit a degree of bias here as I have said previously I'm not a great fan of the nebulous 1NT in 2/1. If the E/W robots had bid at the Level of Total Tricks immediately to 4♦, you have no way knowing whether the 1NT response has been bid on a good or bad hand. With SAYC partner would have bid 2♣, and whilst that bid doesn't improve your hand, you at least know he has 10+ points somewhere.

Both approaches have their merits and drawbacks, although I think I would give up Bridge rather than return to natural 10+ 2/1 responses. In this case, I wouldn't be pulling my hair out in the scenario you describe. The combination of 1NT response plus opponents bidding diamonds fiercely makes things simple, no need to worry about missing slam and no reason to leave game untried with that obscene offence/defence ratio. Over 4♦ I bid 4♥ and let partner decide.

[nullve]

 The_Badger, on 2018-November-01, 11:13, said:

I must admit a degree of bias here as I have said previously I'm not a great fan of the nebulous 1NT in 2/1. If the E/W robots had bid at the Level of Total Tricks immediately to 4♦, you have no way knowing whether the 1NT response has been bid on a good or bad hand.

---

Pretend to you haven't read this thread and guess North's shape and strength.

[Cyberyeti]

 nullve, on 2018-November-01, 12:57, said:

---

Pretend to you haven't read this thread and guess North's shape and strength.

2326 10-11 ish would be normal ?

[pescetom]

 Cyberyeti, on 2018-November-01, 13:18, said:

2326 10-11 ish would be normal ?

Either that or 2317 or 2416, same strength

[Cyberyeti]

 pescetom, on 2018-November-01, 15:11, said:

Either that or 2317 or 2416, same strength

2416 just bids 4♥ surely unless the honours are completely in the wrong places

[pescetom]

 Cyberyeti, on 2018-November-01, 16:43, said:

2416 just bids 4♥ surely unless the honours are completely in the wrong places

Correct, of course.