TylerE

Repeat after me. GIB does not understand penalty doubles. GIB does not understand penalty doubles. GIB does not understand penalty doubles. The sooner you embrace this the sooner you will do better. All Xs are takeout through 7NT, and it doesn't understand X and Bid as a big offshape hand either.

1♠ for me on first. Way too good for a W/R 1st seat 3-level preempt. If the hand were 7222 that'd be more like it. But good suit, a potentially useful queen, AND a singleton is too much. If you're going to hold a gun to my head and force me to not open 1♠ I think it's clearly better to open 4 than 3, and let the chips fall where they may. The vuln is right for it and even if I catch nothing at all opposite I would expect to get out for no worse than down 3. That said, I don't think it's that bad a bid - but not one than I want to make because then partner is going to start raiding to 4 on balanced 10 counts, which is going to get expensive opposite what I *likely* have for a W/R preempt. Passing out 2♥ on the 2nd is...bad. Like, I'd bid 3♣ there without the K♦. This is way less of a marginal decision than the first hand. Anyone who doesn't bid 3♣ there should have the EMTs called because they have no pulse. Let me be clear, pass is here IS terrible with no redeeming qualties what-so-ever.

Really? Have you seen the garbage people overcall on these days? This isn't 1952 with the field playing Roth-Stone.

Sorry, but this is nonsense. The two auctions are nothing alike. On 1♥ (1♠) 2♦ responder and opener are totally unlimited.

Wasn't there also a rule, at least at one point, that no more half of the points required to obtain a rank could be colorless?

You'll only poison your bridge by obsessing over how the robots play: It ain't bridge.

Just F. Does not agree suit. Keeps the auction alive and disallows passing (usually below game, partership agreement wether bailing out in 4m is allowed, and when)

Normal 1♠ for me. No one wants to play in clubs. I have 4SF available to force later. If the clubs were better AND the spades were worse I could see some logic in starting with 2♣, but I see no such compulsion here.

Your local old folks home, if there's even any one left there. That ship sailed 10-20 years ago.

Disagree. Playing it out in an obvious situation is effectively calling your opponents morons who can't count to 13. The claim dialog should say something like "I claim N out of the last X tricks. You get (X-N) tricks."

If they've stumbled into one by accident, so be it. -400 is already a MP zero. That's the nice thing about doubling on an auction like that... it is, in theory, basically all upside... it can't turn a zero into...more of a zero, but it can turn an average result (+100, say) into a top.

Which is why I think that reversing on these 14-15s is such a bad idea to the point where these bids just don't exist. It's not that I think opening 1C on them is GOOD (I'm not advocating for that at all), but if you were to have a hand SO GOOD that you would consider a reverse reasonble...

It is what it is. GIB does not, and has not, ever played penalty doubles at any level.

Basically this auctions don't exist. Should show like a 6-5 or something I guess, but basically they don't exist. If you feel a 5-4 hand is good enough to reverse with, just open it 1C. If I was going to the trouble of making agreements about such things, I would probably play them as some sort of artificial raise of partners suit. (Splinter? Fragment? Something like that?) But as someone who plays about 100 hands of Precision a week, I haven't felt the need to make such a natural reverse in at least the last year or so. I will say that with a traditional 13-15 or 14-16 NT, a lot of the 5-4-2-2s just get opened 1N.

Clubs, likely 6 unless something like 1=4=3=5. More clubs, definitely unbalanced. 3NT is a totally nullo bid by a passed hand, just begging to go about -500 with no running tricks. For that matter 2NT is highly questionable. You should be passing 2♣ pretty much any time you don't have 6 spades. If my opponents perpetrated this auction at my table I would be doubling 3NT on any 13 cards and expecting to collect at least +300.

Really? I thought that was considered a bit prehistoric even by most ACOL pairs these days. Am I wrong? It certainly seems bad to give up not just one but TWO bids to poorly describe low frequency hand types.

Absolutely not. It’s way way too good. I would evaluate it at something like 17 or 18. Even stronger if a fit exists

I'm not going to go as far as cyberyeti, but this hand is def. too good for a 15-17 NT (Which in actual expert practice is more like good 14-bad 17)... this is a pretty good 17. 1♦-1♥-2NT and then you're going to end up somewhere (albeit probably not 4♥. I _suspect_ on this auction E will throw in a 1 or 2♠ bid over 1♥, which makes it easier to get to a suit rather than 3NT.

Not opening 1♣ is a gross misevaluation. That hand is not only not pass, not only a minimum opening, I'd go so far as to call it above average.

Passing 2♣ is dumb, if that's what you're suggesting. Double negative is also kinda dumb (as a convention)

X. The one with shortness has to act.

It really doesn't change that much. Exactly 4=4=3=2 shape is something like 1.5% Even when I played a precision system where 1♦ was 0+, it had 4+ D like 65% of time, and fewer than 2 practically never.

1. One round force if unpassed, NF BPH 2. Redouble DENIES A FIT unless dealing with slam force type values 3. New suits are forcing. 4. Whatever you agree, not sure there really is a standard 6. 10+, denies a fit unless uber-strong 7. No 8. Not really

1♠ Anything else is a mistake.

1. I would open without thinking twice about it. Spades are spades. 2. I prefer 1NT personally. 3. Don't like 3d at all. This is just a bid with no upsides. It's the kind of bid someone who regrets not opening an opening hand makes. 4. 3♠! Automatic! What else could it be but 3 card support?