Huibertus

This would be a pointless overview. It would show for instance you can make 12 tricks in ♥, and if you examine declarer play that will lead to 12 tricks in hearts it might turn out to be a play that is unlikely to succeed, ie dropping a bare K in a side 4-4 fit, where any decent player would just take the finess.

The bidding of this hand by robot's is completely ridiculous. Why on earth would you not pass 3NT, when you hold QTX in opponents suit and partner states he has stopped that suit. Makes no sense on either of the sequences. It's a balanced bare minimum, not worth a second bid even believing QTX does not help. As for your remarks on 2♠, I'm fine with 2♠ on this had, it is certainly better then 1♠ as you are not advocating a constructive hand, opposite a passed hand, and partner should consider not to lead ♠ with AX or KX. However, 2♠ is ONLY ok if the partnership understanding is that you will fully stretch bidding to the maximum preemptive level and THEREFORE partner will NEVER raise holding a hand like North. The agreement should also include the option to double a cue opponents bid to suggest NOT to lead your suit. The idea being, get in as high as you dare and then stay out hoping they guess wrong. So the robot should not support but then I guess the robot is not aware of this partnership approach, hence my choice to pass.

IMHO 2NT NAT is always a stupid idea, if it is passed by partner you should have been in 1NT or in 3NT. There is always some artificial meaning to be agreed upon that is of better use. So dump the robot and find a decent partner ;)

No I don't like Jacoby for a super fit. However, lacking any other bid for a super bid it is a lot better then 1NT or 2, 3 or 4 ♠ on THIS hand. This topic is not about the question what to open with the south hand, it is about what to respond to a 1♠ opening. However, I do agree with the underlying message that opening + opening is not enough for game is you open roughly all 11HCP 5 cards major, but it's just off topic. Yes, responding with this hand, of course 4 ♠ might go down. But no way we are stopping below game with a known 6-5 fit and 10/11 HCP hands partner can have that would provide a cold slam. And for that reason, again, you MUST set up a forcing pass situation in case opps bid at the 5 level too. So Jacoby 2NT simply is the only bid that makes sense. Apart from that, constructing example hands to show game can go down, it indeed helps to almost mirror short and longer suits in both hands like you do on the first 4 hands, but the opposite of course is more likely, like the 10HCP count Cyberyeti gave earlier.

Game force does not mean "guaranteed to make game" It means "we are not stopping below game" This hand is FAR too good to do anything else than a GF in spades. See Cyberyeti's very valid comment. Also, once opps start to interfere on this hand you MUST have a forcing pass at the 5-level, that rules out 1NT, 2♠ and 4 ♠

Very much seconded, two mandatory books for player that want to advance. Studing these will advance your play more then years of practise at the table.

Hand 1, advanced. It's clear you need to elope trumps and it's clear N should not be allowed to ruff one of your high ♠. Easily overlooked at the table, but it does not require expert skills to recognize the right play. Hand 2, intermediate. Straightforward, after T1 ♦ run, so if you ruff a spade you can afford to lose a trump, but not a trump and Club ace on a ruffing finess but hey you dont need a club trick as you are assuming ♥ are 3-2 anyway (you don't have the entries to finess twice in ♥ so if they are 4-1 you are down anyway) So the succesfull play is automatic. Hand 3, intermediate. Both can have ♣ K, But if W does not have it, East might have led clubs, and W might have decide to double 3 ♥ with AKXX ♦, I would prefer the winning play, but that will fail sometimes where the losing play wins, it's close.

4th suit forcing being a game force is a matter of partnership agreement. Some partnerships play 2♣/2♦ as invitational +. IF 2♣ is INV+ then East should bid 3N instead of 2♠. However, this hand also illustrates why playing support redoubles may not be the wisest thing. If E in reality has an invitational hand then W should be able to redouble to show an interest to defend. NS will go down at least two to allow EW to win against any part score they would end up in without South's double. And on this E hand EW would still be able to reach 3N. If partnership agreement is 2♣ is a game force, 2♣ followed by 2♠ by E is fine as W is not allowed to pass. However I would still want to redouble with the W to show interest to defend, if E has more clubs (less ♥ and or less ♠) NS will not escape for less then game value. And if NS to decide to let you play 1♥XX that should normally be fine on a 4-2 fit with having at least 26/27 HCP.

That IMHO would depend. With a stop, 1NT. Without, if your high cards are mostly suitable for NT (QJT's K more or less neutral), pass, If your HCP is mostly suitable to play suits, depends on partnership agreement, are three card majors fine for a double or not... If so, double, your extra HCP is compensation to play a part score in a suit in a 4/3 fit and partner will not jump to 4M on a 4 card but use a cue to find out more, if not, pass.

Regardles of which type of signal you use, signals will always help your side and they will always help the opponents. Which side is helped the most does depend on the actual hand, but also on the relative strenght of the opposing partnerships. That said, there will be nothing that will hurt your side more than lack of agreement, due to misunderstandings, so decide on what type of signals you use and stick to it. Only when you become experts become a bit more flexible and agree on being allowed to apply switch signal types once it the play and dummy makes clear the agreed signal doesn't add value.

Just for the love of the game, some hands are so beautiful... 7♠ The bots made a trick less in the small slam.

Personally I don't like Soloway jumps at all, I hate it being part of the Robot convention card, it is an autopreempt and I'd rather preempt opponents on weak hands instead. But since it is on the connvention card, apply it in the right way, this hand does not qualify. https://www.bridgebum.com/soloway_jump_shifts.php

Double. This is a great support if partner proposes to play ♦,♥ and ♠, which is what double implies. On top of that, if partner bids NT, your ♣ K is a great asset and your hand looks good too. Selling all of this as a ♦ hand does not do it justice. You are not going to bid ♦ if partner bids a major, this is nowhere near a strong one-suiter. If partner bids 1♥ I'd pass, a 1♠ or 1♦ response would trigger a 2♣ cue which following a double in my system is invitational+. Anything else partner may bid will lead to a game.

No I'm not the only one. Read the best (or most advanced is probably a better way to describe it) bridge book on play "Adventures in Card Play" and you'll find exactly this message with a proper explanation as to why this is the case. (I'm not remotely claiming I'm capable of plays described in that book ;) )

Improving play requires pattern recognition, no practise with computers or in real life will make you achieve it. Study good books on declarer and defensive play. Improving bidding requires learning a system and agreeing with a partner on it's details. Choose a bidding system with a partner, both study it until you know it by heart. And then discuss it, discuss it and discuss it.

In the end this will come down to some guessing no matter how you plan to bid. So you need to ensure you will be making the best informed guess possible. So start with 1♥ you need to find out how many ♦ partner has, if it is 5, ♦Q doesn't matter. The way to find out certainly is NOT a soloway jump. Don't splinter. A splinter in ♣ or in ♠ will make partner very enthousiastic if he has wasted honours in the other black suit. It could lead him to bid a slam ♦XXX. So establish how many ♦ partner likely has, agree on ♦ and then either guess, use RCKB and then guess, or use Josephine and then guess. Exclusion blackwood is nonsense on this hand, which suit are you excluding? Two suit exclusion would be great, but I don't think that exists... If opps are so kind to bid both blacks, then cue bid them both and let partner decide. BTW once the level of play has been decide we will correct to playing ♥ I suppose...

I have used this in the past to exactly show a good 6card minor and exactly 3 card support for the major in the 16-19 HCP range. A very usefull meaning IMHO.

What is the fun of bidding like this?

It is good play, if like in reality SK is where it is, it is a show up squeeze if it is ducked and CQ is in the West hand too. So it adds stiff or doubleton Q in East to the succes. It would of course also work a an automatic queeze against E if East had SK and CQXX. But you will be down with QXX in East and SK in west. All in all I believe it is the percentage play.

It is NOT "Relying on" it is making use of an extra chance. Which is sound technique against a robot and agains a human. If the defensive error is not made, it still is the club finess that is required to work, just as it was from the start. By the way, could it be possible the robot knows of the distribution of the reds in declarers hand, and deduces the hand is a make with X/AKJX in the blacks because he has CQ, and therefore decides not to slip the hand with JX/AKJ in the blacks? It might not be a "gross misdefense" at all!

What I can picture is 7♦, 7♥. In order to get there, of prevent getting there, you need to GET information, so bid 1♥, dont SEND information by bidding 2♥ and remove the space to hear your partner out.

Exactly my thoughts.

It's just like unknown people kibitzing in real life. I don't mind.

Next time you decide to open such a hand, open 1NT if that is 12-14, or open 2♠ weak if available. Now, do whatever is weak, but don't pass, and hope you don't end up too high.

You have denied ♦ control. So My take would be ; 4 ♥ which also denies a ♦ control, says nothing about ♣, bid 4♣ which would promiss 1st ♣ AND at least 2nd ♦ control, or 4♦ which would be 1st / 2nd ♦ control and denies 1st ♣ control.