Yu18772

1) Pass. Do not know who makes what, but wasn't pushing them to 5 the point? I had no expectation of partner necessarily making 4!s. 2) Double. If they make, this is a bad board anyway, if they don't double is the only way we get better than 420 score. 2nd looks more obvious to me than 1st, but I can't say either are clear cut. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif Yu

Open 1♦ (not even close imo), rebid 4♦. :)Yu

If they cash A 5th and exit that major, you have 3 tricks in that major, 2 in the other, 2 diamonds and 2 clubshttp://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

http://tinyurl.com/d2vc5r3 http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

Bradley- 4th suit forcing has many more meanings than just "artificial forcing to game" in normal bridge. It allows to ask and show many hands, none of which contain the 4th suit naturally, and definitely does not contain 4 cards. For example, one common use in standard 2/1 bidding for 4th suit is to ask for stopper for 3NT for example or show problem in strain choice... Another one (like what was supposed to be on this hand) is to start a bidding where it shows 5-5 (by rebidding te 4th suit over partners bid). If you have a +/- balanced hand with normal quality of the 4th suit there is no reason why you should not bid NT - in general thats the strain you would like to play in, not the minor. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

http://tinyurl.com/cc2axcd 1st - I noticed that gib plays 4th suit bid as natural, I just dont get why? Also, imo Gib should bid 4!d (forcing) and let partner ask aces, in 2/1 auctions 3!d-6!d should not really exist. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

http://tinyurl.com/cvtcala Why did Gib decide on X, rather than normal forcing 2!h? Gib also decided no to show his 5 card major later.....in normal bidding Gib bidding would deny more than 4 hearts completely. Second issue is why Gib bids cuebids instead of NT with stoppers, and what is a "likely stop" (almost pregnant style?)? There is not exactly much room between 3♠ to 3NT to find out how likely is "likely stop". http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

Bidding 5!c when partner may very well have a 4 card spade suit or heart tricks seems quite unilateral to me. Don't expect him to volunteer 4♠ with a balnced minimum. X as strong t/o is pretty standard in this position imo... http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

http://tinyurl.com/avtb6oe Gib should not leave this double in imo. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

Thank you Bradley - done, I won't see anymore posts from you..... http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

Bradley - you started the attacks, and highjacking a thread is rude wether you are staff or not - you are experienced enough to know what it means, based on your constant posting here. If you are not, after posting in bbo for the last 2 years - google it before you make personal remarks. And if you are so happy to answer questions - may ne you know how I may block specific users from commenting on my posts (like the enemy button)? http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

http://tinyurl.com/at28usz 1NT is unusual overcall? I think that with 5-5 in minors and 11+ I would act over 1!h.... In general it is a bit frustrating that on most auctions GIB ignores the initial pass, and gives the same meaning (or some weird impossible meaning) to your bid. I usually try to mouse over, but it didn't occur to me that 1NT could be anything unusual. Happy thanksgiving. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

http://tinyurl.com/bs52awl Wrong explanation of 3♦ - it is 0-9 HCP not 4-9 (what would you do with xx,xxx,xxxxx,xxx?) and of 4♣ - don't think it has to show 4 spades or 4 diamonds, and definitely 5+ clubs not, 5-..... http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

Since the personel is not exactly listed, I assumed that the person who posts about GIB updates and replies to questions actually woks here. Frankly I could not care less what exactly your position is. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

http://tinyurl.com/d4c2kdd GIB usually uses the law - so its pretty weird white on red it passed 2♠ - 10 trumps, nothing in their suit.... http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

Bradley - thank you for the prompt and personal response! I think you don't get the meaning of highjack the thread - yes, you made a response to a question. A question that had nothing to do with the OP - adding a functionality to ACBL tournament is not about how badly GIB plays..... I don't expect Jane not to post the question, I am pretty sure she did that with the best of intentions - which is exactly why I expect the people that work on this forum (i.e. YOU) to say "Jane adding functionality to ACBL is a topic for another post." and NOT discuss it here. If you want to be nice - open one for her - this way people can actually see the discussion about what Jane asked and add ideas, rather than hiding a discussion about something that other people may wonder about in a totally unrelated thread. In the future I suggest you refrain from making personal attacks on me - being rude to users of this forum is not one of your privileges to the best of my knowledge. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

This has nothing to do with the original thread - please open a separate topic for this. Thread highjacking is not a usually accepted practice on BBO discussions - although I see Bradley made an exception. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

http://tinyurl.com/chqctwd http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

It does not (and should not) if it sees JT on the table, unless holding K9xx.

http://tinyurl.com/batvysv http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

http://tinyurl.com/czodwy9 look at the explanation of 2♠ - I almost definitely do NOT have 3 - i did not support double, so even Gib should know its only 2. Also - even if I have the described hand, Gib doesnt have the 4!s bid in any case. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

http://tinyurl.com/bfervlm I lost finesses many times, but to loose one that I already won is a special kind of talent..... http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

"How takeout-orientated is the second double?" Not really - it is more penalty oriented for most people that I know. Wether it shows exactly 4 spades and something useful in ♥ or it shows less than 4 spades and penalty per se and which is best - don't know. If your RHO would bid 3♦ X would be t/o for most people I think, showing equal majors. At matchpoints I would double, in IMPs I would bid 3♠ or pass. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

http://tinyurl.com/apmk62o It would be funny, if it didn't completely get on my nerves - it a long know problem - can you fix it ????? Could you just add to his bidding algorithm a statement "if (partner bids 3NT) { pass }" - really it would work better than gib's current judgement. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

Does 3x show some good hand, or any hand with 5422? I think that if 3x does not show extra, than at this point someone should really try to limit the hand or at least show wether its an absolute minimum or not.... We played a little differently than your agreements - 3x shows reasonable 14+hcp and 4+ card minor (did not deny singeltons), 3M did not show any extras, but 4M would be some really horrible hand absolutely no 1st or 2nd control in unbid suits for sure. Also, we did not keep 3NT as a playable option after double fit was found even in MP. In this setup we used 3M+1 as unserious (if M is ♥ than 3♠ is minimum and 3NT by responder is ♠ control) - all this in the M suit. Any direct cue is serious for M suit, and sets it as trump. Since we would want to go back to minor only for slam purposes, so it made sense that: 1M-2x 3x-3M 4x or 1M-2x 3x-3M 3M+1*-4x both show a hand with serious slam interest in the minor, and 4M over that shows no slam interest whatsoever. This is somewhat simple, but worked well. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu