p_t_red Posted January 8, 2011 Report Share Posted January 8, 2011 Pass 1♣ 2♥ 3♥ Dbl 4NT Pass Pass Pass I'm the 1♣ bidder, and my GIB passed a 4NT bid thatin anyone's game would be forcing with:♠752 ♥void ♦AJ53 ♣A86432 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted January 8, 2011 Report Share Posted January 8, 2011 What was 3♥ explained as? What was 4NT explained as? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p_t_red Posted January 9, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 What was 3♥ explained as? What was 4NT explained as? The 3♥ bid was explained as:Cue: limit raise or better -- 4+ C; 12+ total points; forcing to 3N The 4NT bid was explained as:3+ C; 11-21 HCP; 12-22 total points Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahydra Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 The 4NT explanation clearly makes no sense - surely more than a minimum hand (else why not 3NT?), surely something in hearts. I imagine just about every human would play it as Blackwood for clubs. The problem is - I believe anyway - that GIB needs to be taught loads of bidding sequences rather than using some kind of algorithm to work out the meanings of the more obscure bids for itself. ahydra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 So it wasn't explained as forcing, and why did you expect GIB to bid on when it thinks you might have only 11 HCP? I mean it might not make very much sense to define 4NT this way (even if it were quantitative it would need to show more points), but don't say "GIB passed a forcing bid"... it wasn't forcing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 The 4NT bid was explained as:3+ C; 11-21 HCP; 12-22 total pointsIsn't this exactly the same as the description of the 1♣ bid? I think this happens too often; each bid should somehow restrict the prior description of the hand (except when the bidder is making a forced response to a transfer or relay). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotShot Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 It's my impression that if GIB does not know the meaning of a bid, it takes the meaning of the last bid/sequence it understood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p_t_red Posted January 9, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 So it wasn't explained as forcing, and why did you expect GIB to bid on when it thinks you might have only 11 HCP? I mean it might not make very much sense to define 4NT this way (even if it were quantitative it would need to show more points), but don't say "GIB passed a forcing bid"... it wasn't forcing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p_t_red Posted January 9, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 RKC Blackwood is always forcing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manudude03 Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 It didn't say it was RKC blackwood though. It isn't even that uncommon an agreement for 4NT to be to play when the agreed suit is a minor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p_t_red Posted January 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 It didn't say it was RKC blackwood though. It isn't even that uncommon an agreement for 4NT to be to play when the agreed suit is a minor. In this auction 3NT would be to play. A jump to 4NT has to be a form of ace-asking, and since GIB's cue-bid set the trump suit, it must be RKC for that suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manudude03 Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 I didn't say it was standard, but merely that a lot of pairs do play 4NT as simply a hand that's too good to bid 3NT. It's just a slightly more unusual form of 1NT-4NT (which pretty much every decent pair plays as quantitative). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 I suspect that anyone who plays it as natural also uses some other ace-asking convention, such as Minorwood or Kickback. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BunnyGo Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 In this auction 3NT would be to play. A jump to 4NT has to be a form of ace-asking, and since GIB's cue-bid set the trump suit, it must be RKC for that suit. The point is that when you play with GIB you don't get to discuss the system, it tells you what you're playing. Whether you agree or not, your bid was not blackwood (whether anyone would agree or not). So while you could (should?) suggest that the GIB system be changed, you cannot reasonably say that it passed your forcing bid because within the system you and your partner (GIB) agreed on the bid was not forcing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.