iandayre

I wouldn't recommend a human partner bid 7S, but given GIB's limitations at the slam level - it can't count 13 tricks in NT after a response to 5NT guarantees them - I thought I would take the opportunity to praise GIB. And to point out that 3/4 of the field found ways to stay out of the grand, when all you had to do was make 3 simple, systemic calls to get there this time. But I agree with your point that I could have bid BW myself over 4C. As far as the initial response goes, GIB's splinters are quite limited. This is a treatment that is growing on me. You know not to expect too much.

I held this hand opposite GIB today in an ACBL Robot Tournament QJ9xx AK Kx AJTx 18 HCP, obvious 1S opener. GIB responds 2NT, Jacoby 4 card raise. The system rebid is clearly 3S (maximum 18+), which I made. GIB bid 4C - hmmm, since I have the A, probably a void. What could come next but 4H? Can't imagine so I bid that and GIB jumped to 7S with AKTx, Txxxx, AQTx, Void. Easy make. But only 1/4 of the field got there. Not a single call I made was the slightest bit difficult or questionable. Point? You usually get the best results from GIB when you bid your own hand accurately.

I didn't suggest otherwise. Just expressing my personal preference. I do not and would not play with GIB against human opponents.

Given that he got a response from Fred, I think the OP had a point!

With all the issues GIB's bidding has, it helps to have the extra information provided when playing in tournaments, that no hand has more HCP than yours. I would have had no problem bidding 2H knowing my partner had no more than 11, and strength opposite my singleton.

Once again we see that GIB doubles on the basis of HCP, not trump tricks. My guess (certainly could be wrong) is that CHO bid 4H 'to make" despite knowing that GIB would play it as a preempt, and did bid again. If so, you got exactly what you deserved.

There are many descriptions that are equally self-contradictory. Another point made here many times - GIB cuebids over partner's double way too often. A simple 2H call by N is fine. And the problem is compounded by the fact that GIB has trouble finding sensible rebids after partner's cuebids.

Isn't the real point to this hand that E should DOUBLE the Michaels bid instead of emphasizing the very weak D suit?. I partner can double H - as he could here - you are carting them out. And E knows what to do when the opps pick Spades. Yes on the actual auction 5D is a big overbid.

I am a huge proponent of Soloway SJS, but only at the two level. I believe I can answer any questions about how to proceed after making one, or if your GIB partner makes one. Of course in "human best hand" tournaments, an SJS by GIB is extremely rare! I have seen only one.

Garbage Stayman automatic with this had, and penalties or not, I am pulling to 3D.

Leaping Michaels shows a GOOD HAND. This isn't close to qualifying.

Right of course ArtK. The umpteenth example of a description that allows a suit length (4+) that is nonsense, it must show 5 at minimum.

I have said this before, but here's another example. If basic GIBs can't manage to take 12 tricks on this hand, they should be retired. Some posters have said that it may be significantly cheaper for BBO to run the basic robots, but I haven't heard anyone from BBO confirm that. Doesn't really matter to me since I never play with basics.

To go back to the original question, I would say that, first and most importantly, GIB is minimum for its 2/1 GF response. I am not suggesting that this is the best way to bid, but it is how GIB bids. Secondly, while 2S does not deny significant extras, it would seem to deny both significant extras and a very good S suit. 2S didn't promise 6.

Auction seems normal through 3H. Why GIB E bid 3S is anyone's guess. The 3H bid is described as natural (4+)

Agreed, both sequences are egregiously bad. North has nothing resembling a slam bid, and S has to take further action after passing. Your 3H bid was fine.

Certainly should be as intended at the table, showing H. I hate the 3NT call by W, has already forced to game and shown both suits, why not pass?

Deleted

Well it's MP's and at favorable. N has also passed twice. The call I don't like is West's cuebid.

Good question. Makes no sense to me, should bid 4S IMO. As for your bidding, seems normal and straightforward.

delete duplicate

An interesting thought, but I would say no. In support double situations, typically responder has shown 4+ rather than exactly 4. One big benefit is to allow responder to compete when holding decent values with a modest 5 card suit he wouldn't wish to freely rebid with no indication of support. Using it just to show a 4-3 isn't as valuable. And of course Jack is completely correct, 3D is hopeless, double is the only sensible call. I can't count the times I have said that one of GIB's biggest problems is allowing bids on short suits that for any sensible human player would require 5-6 or more card length. In this hand, just about any conceivable action - pass, double, 2S, 2NT, even 3H - is better than 3D

It is quite standard to Pass the S hand opposite a penalty double of a strong 1NT. There is no reason to believe that playing in a suit is better.

My suggestion - be conservative after having opened 2C. GIB is a bit overly aggressive in these auctions. And bid your own hand. You have no part of a 7NT bid with a human partner, and less so with GIB.

Two things you should learn to be more successful bidding with GIB: 1) It doubles based on HCP - not trump tricks. In fact you will often find GIB, having subsided in an auction and having had an opponent bid a suit where it has a big stack, now bid its own side's suit again. It often appears from a human perspective that GIB believes the opponents' bidding more than what it sees in its own hand. 2) GIB never plays its partner for taking a sacrifice. If you bid again when not forced, it thinks you are stronger. And while I can't say this with 100% certainty, I don't think it plays forcing passes unless you are below game, and forced to game. I have seen it pass in an auction such as 2C - P - 2D - 2S (overcall), P by opener, passed out. I clearly understand that these are severe weaknesses but that is where we are. Unfortunately it is apparently difficult to impossible to program in such general concepts. I also acknowledge that sometimes, as here, you as GIB's partner have an impossible task as far as sensibly reaching the best contract is concerned.