[pilowsky]

I think the biggest penalty of learning Bridge by playing with and against robots is that you don't know anything about signalling.
Another deficit relates to the meaning of some sequences that are common knowledge outside GIB-land.
In this real-life situation the bidding came round to me and continued as shown.
In this sequence where GIB Stayman's and bids again it always has 8+ - often more.
What kind of hand would be appropriate for the 2♥ bid in your systems.

---

[Cyberyeti]

In weak no trump land where I play, this is 5 hearts, 4 spades and to play, in strong no trump land it may be different.

[DavidKok]

In my system this would be Garbage Stayman, showing 5 hearts and 4 spades¹ with a weak hand and commanding partner to pass. Some people prefer Crawling Stayman instead, where this bid only shows a weak hand with at least 4-4 in the majors and opener is welcome to correct to 2♠ holding 3=2 in the majors.
Some people play Puppet Stayman, in which case the entire sequence takes on a different meaning. Some people play 2-way Stayman, in which case this auction would show 5(+) hearts and an invitational hand, but it is a NF bid.
I don't know any people who play regular Stayman but also insist this auction shows 8(+) points, although I do vaguely remember reading in some beginner bridge books that Stayman shows at least invitational values. I think this style is thoroughly out of date.

¹On occasion we might run with only 4-4 in the majors, but partner will still expect a 4=5. Also we might bid this way with some rare 4=6's or 5=5's.

[pescetom]

I wouldn't worry about having learned a non- standard Stayman because as DavidKok says there are infinite variations anyway.
Just to take this one basic sequence, in my main partnership opener has denied a 5=card major and responder has spades, with most others responder is very weak with 4+(nominally 5) spades and 4+ hearts, but some of my opponents still play it like GIB.

Starting signals from scratch with a good human partner is probably better than picking up conflicting agreements and bad habits over the years too. The real problem as always is to find a good partner willing to work together.

[helene_t]

I saw Zia and some partner have an accident on vugraph where responder had 5-4 majors (apparently 2♥ showed a weak hand with both majors, either could be longer) and opener passed with 2-2 in the majors. I think that's a bad system

Some Dutch pairs play it as showing specifically five spades but 4+ hearts (ostensibly weak), if this is forcing I can understand as it allows 2♥ to contain some strong hands also. This is quite nice because you can then play for example
2♣ ... 3m as forcing, but
2♣ ... 2♥ ... 3m as non-forcing

Invitational with 5+ hearts as GIB plays it is also fine. The modern "mad scientist" trend is to play 2♣ ... 2♠ as invitational with five spades because 2♥ ... 2NT is artificial, and then playing 2♣ ... 2♥ as a natural invite also (albeit with the difference that this sequence also shows spades, but opener won't usually care) gives you some symmetry.

[pescetom]

helene_t, on 2022-February-15, 04:48, said:

I saw Zia and some partner have an accident on vugraph where responder had 5-4 majors (apparently 2♥ showed a weak hand with both majors, either could be longer) and opener passed with 2-2 in the majors. I think that's a bad system

Some Dutch pairs play it as showing specifically five spades but 4+ hearts (ostensibly weak), if this is forcing I can understand as it allows 2♥ to contain some strong hands also. This is quite nice because you can then play for example
2♣ ... 3m as forcing, but
2♣ ... 2♥ ... 3m as non-forcing

Invitational with 5+ hearts as GIB plays it is also fine. The modern "mad scientist" trend is to play 2♣ ... 2♠ as invitational with five spades because 2♥ ... 2NT is artificial, and then playing 2♣ ... 2♥ as a natural invite also (albeit with the difference that this sequence also shows spades, but opener won't usually care) gives you some symmetry.

I agree crawling would be a worse agreement with rather wild 1nt openings as in my main partnership: I only play it in a more conservative system where opener's majors will never be 2-2.

Another trend here (hardly "mad scientist") is to play 1nt 2♧ 2◇ 2♤ as forcing, which enables it to be used with a range of hands.

[mikeh]

helene_t, on 2022-February-15, 04:48, said:

I saw Zia and some partner have an accident on vugraph where responder had 5-4 majors (apparently 2♥ showed a weak hand with both majors, either could be longer) and opener passed with 2-2 in the majors. I think that's a bad system

Some Dutch pairs play it as showing specifically five spades but 4+ hearts (ostensibly weak), if this is forcing I can understand as it allows 2♥ to contain some strong hands also. This is quite nice because you can then play for example
2♣ ... 3m as forcing, but
2♣ ... 2♥ ... 3m as non-forcing

Invitational with 5+ hearts as GIB plays it is also fine. The modern "mad scientist" trend is to play 2♣ ... 2♠ as invitational with five spades because 2♥ ... 2NT is artificial, and then playing 2♣ ... 2♥ as a natural invite also (albeit with the difference that this sequence also shows spades, but opener won't usually care) gives you some symmetry.

I guess in one partnership I’m even madder than your mad scientist😀

In one, I play this as scrambling or garbage but in the other I play it as a spade transfer, showing precisely invitational values, with 1N 2C 2D 2S being used as either a balanced invite or a gf hand with 4 hearts and a longer minor.

Btw, extended transfers are a very powerful approach: they don’t arise often but they are very good for slam and game bidding when responder has a two suited good hand.

The above is in the context of a strong (for us, 14-16) 1N.

[steve2005]

Invitational 5♥4♠