peachy

I meant instead of DBL, BEFORE the 3♠ bid, duh. GIB plays Support Doubles so 2S might (I don't know this for sure in GIB's system) deny 3-card support if you failed to use it; not sure how much it would disrupt the auction to mislead GIB in that respect. And 3S of course would be splinter.

This happened to my partner also, twice. It was just a table to play some hands, not a team game and I had reserved a seat for my partner. He got disconnected when accepting the automated invite. I don't use the web version, I use the old one and so does my partner.

Pass. If this were a 2nd seat vulnerable vs notvul 3C, I might have something to think about bu probably still Pass.

Pass.

I think nobody was "upset". You just needed to be told that The Law has nothing to do with this hand. I transfer and bid again if forced to or given the chance. When partner volunteers the 2H bid, I go to game.

Overcaller has great hand, just short of Dbl first and then bid diamonds. Probably shapely. I bid 5D now and I would also have passed over 1H.

3C. I expect this to be unanimous.

I don't like the Dbl on 4H with a void in their suit; I assume it was meant as penalty (?), but responder has dug his own grave by responding with subminimum values. Assume 1C was not forcing. I might chicken out and pull the Dbl with S hand, but if pulling turned out wrong, I would be the one to blame for whatever happened, typucally turning a plus into a minus. 1S is not a clearcut error, it sometimes works.

I lead a heart, in hopes of getting one heart and two club tricks, or a third trick somewhere. I feel this is not making and heart void is not completely guaranteed though likely with RHO. However, heart must be led from my side when hearts are played, either now or later. Second choice for opening lead is small trump.

[hv=n=sq82hk108da872ca87&s=sj10976haq42dj10ck9]133|200|[/hv] Dealer N, Vul none, IMPs 1D (3C) - take it from here and tell me what contract you would end up in. And what contract would be best. What should responder do? If Dbl, what should opener do? Standard methods, Dbl would be negative etc etc.

My reading of this is not that 3♦ shows length in diamonds and it was initially a game try, but once opener carried on to game it became a slam try. Note the words (emphasis mine) cue bid. This implies that the meaning of 3♦ after the 4♥ call is actually substantially different -- initially it showed "length in diamonds and a game try" but now it showed "control of diamonds and a slam try." Note that a help-suit try always involves 3+ cards in the suit, and could be quite a weak suit like Qxxx or even perhaps xxx. A cue bid is a very different thing, and could easily be based on shortage (like AK-tight or even a small singleton) but never a suit like Qxxx or xxx. I agree that the change from "help suit game try" to "help suit slam try" should not require an alert -- 3♦ is basically natural in either case. But the change from "help suit game try" to "first or second round control in this suit" (which is how I'm reading the original post) is quite different. This is an implication that the 3♦ call did not in fact show length in diamonds, and certainly requires an alert. Agree, but *IF* something is alertable, it would be the 4H call; it is at that point that the nature of the 3D call is clarified as cue bid and slam try instead of HSGT or even a Natural game try. The OP says they had the agreement the 4H now showed a diamond cue bid (not length, not HSGT). I am sure blackshoe will post here what ACBL response will be - if he gets an answer.

This is again one auction where there is no penalty Dbl or even an Optional/values dbl available at all because by system (per OP) Dbl is a game try. I would much rather have Dbl as "balanced maximum with defense and only 4-card suit" than as a game try. As it is, what kind of hand does opener need to accept - responder knows that opener is not leaving the Dbl in [looking at our AJx in the opponent's suit and a side ace]. So the ball is back at the responder's court next round with no useful information exchanged. Perhaps I am out of touch with modern style... but given the system choices, I would rather Dbl than bid 3H. Pass is out of the question.

It is against the laws of the game to go into such guess work strategies. Knowing what the laws say and doing it anyway, makes it unethical.

The terms "natural game try" and "help suit game try" are mutually exclusive, they are not synonyms and there is a difference. Natural game try shows a suit. Help suit game try asks partner about that suit and the person making that try typically has three cards in the suit of interest such as xxx or even as good as Qxx. Neither of these are alertable in the ACBL. Doesn't the ACBL consider a bid natural if it shows three or more cards in minor and four or more in a major? Yes.

The terms "natural game try" and "help suit game try" are mutually exclusive, they are not synonyms and there is a difference. Natural game try shows a suit. Help suit game try asks partner about that suit and the person making that try typically has three cards in the suit of interest such as xxx or even as good as Qxx. Neither of these are alertable in the ACBL.

However, if you had the agreement that 4H in the given auction says opener has a diamond cuebid instead of a help suit bid, then 4H needs an alert while 3D certainly does not need an alert in ACBL where help suit game tries are not alertable. Absent agreement to the contrary, the 3D is still a Help Suit Try but turned out to be a slam try instead of game try.

If you have an agreement that 4H clarifies that 3D was advance cue _then_ partner "knows it". Otherwise I would not assume it, and opener might have wanted to just know about the diamond help or even might have made a "Zia" cuebid. If you did have the agreement that 4H changed the HSGT into an Advance Cue Bid, only then would I alert 4H, because at that time the nature of the 3D call became known. Not sure if it is alertable, but it cannot hurt to alert it. Similar situation as in using Stayman which does not promise the asker to have a 4-card major. By ACBL regulation, don't alert the 2C bid but alert the followup bid which denies or tends to deny 4-card major.

I completely agree that such advice is ill. However, as long as the laws are such that an honest player who tells the truth is subject to consequences or penalty while a dishonest player who lies is not, the game will have liars. Very sad.

Okay, I give up. You agree with yourself "it is tough in 2/1". I agree with myself that 2/1 system has nothing to do with the posted problem. It is all clear now :)

I don't see how 2/1 has anything to do with the auction 1D-1H-3D, or 1D-1H-2NT. But maybe it is just that I don't see.

Really? I should like to see an authority for that (sadly, the originator of Jacoby 2NT is no longer with us, but still...) deleted. Edit: Didn't realised blackshoe already responded. Mine is then unnecessary.

1C. Advice you got from an expert partner (is he REALLY an expert?) is very strange.

In Jacoby 2NT, 3-level bid shows a singleton or void. There are a multitude of other methods where 2NT is a LR or GF raise of opener's major, and some erroneously call those "Jacoby 2NT". However, this was ACBL and "C", where Jaoby 2NT is the mainstream so I believe they did play Jacoby 2NT and that opener used UI to misbid 3D. PP is correct even for C level payers for the reactions, gratuitous remarks, and use of UI by both partners.

Whatever it is, it should not be programed to be 15-17 balanced because instead of 1D, GIB would have opened 1NT if it is now prepared to like NT. Or are there balanced hands of 15-17 range that GIB opens 1D? I don't think so, GIB counts points pretty well:) I think the original 18-19 is ok, but I could be persuaded with good arguments or with something I have missed.

GIB is accepting the invite and showing keys on the way and I am guessing it is not an error in explanation. GUESSING, so wait for ari to say what it really is, but in real life such agreement is a common one, to show keys on the way when accepting.