GIB description strikes again

[chasetb]

http://tinyurl.com/3n4p57x

 

4NT was alerted when I bid it as BLACKWOOD (for ♥), not RKC or 1430. I wasn't sure if GIB screwed up the bidding, was actually bidding Blackwood, or was playing 1430 or 0314. As you can see, I figured either it was Blackwood or was 1430, and failed completely.

[dicklont]

I think GIB was thinking quite clever when you started off with 1NT and then jumped to 4NT.

That could never be blackwood because you maximized your hand and GIB showed nothing extra.

Conclusion: South is looking for a minor suit, let's bid the longest.

 

When you had begun with 2♣ and raised 2♥ to 3♥ there would have been lots of room to look for the best slam.

You cannot blame GIB this time!

[barmar]

The only form of Blackwood GIB plays is RKC 3014. If you ever see an explanation that says Blackwood, this is what it means. Even the auction 1♠-4NT is RKC, even though most experts play this as ordinary Blackwood (they would first make their game forcing raise then bid 4NT to use RKC).

 

But you almost certainly confused it. Forcing NT in 2/1 Game Forcing is limited to invitational strength.

[Bbradley62]

I think GIB was thinking quite clever when you started off with 1NT and then jumped to 4NT. That could never be blackwood because you maximized your hand and GIB showed nothing extra. Conclusion: South is looking for a minor suit, let's bid the longest.

This is all pure nonsense. Although (as both Dicklont and Barmar pointed out) you are expected to make a game-forcing bid with your game-forcing hand at your first opportunity, GIB did understand 4NT as RKC(♥) and answered accordingly.

 

I'm curious to hear from others as to whether this is one of those situations where RKC responder is supposed to bid over the apparent sign-off when he has 3, not 0, keycards.

[mgoetze]

Even the auction 1♠-4NT is RKC, even though most experts play this as ordinary Blackwood

 

[Citation needed]

 

 

I'm curious to hear from others as to whether this is one of those situations where RKC responder is supposed to bid over the apparent sign-off when he has 3, not 0, keycards.

 

No, more like one of those situations where RKC responder is supposed to look for a new partner. I mean he bid 1NT and you have 15 points... if he has a real 1NT bid you'll be happy to even make 5.

[georgi]

Whatever form GIB uses for blackwood 03/14 or 14/30 or just 0,4/1/2/3, the respond of 5♣ is explained in mouseover rectangle.

 

You don't need to hesitate whether it was 03/14, the bid will provide you information.

 

you should see something like: Zero or three key cards -- 4+ H; 5+ S; 11+ HCP; 12-18 total points; 3- controls

 

Removing 3 key card possibility ( which are ♠A♠,♥K and ♦A) GIB opening must have

♠KJxxx♥Jxxx♦QJx ♣Q

or ♠KJxxx♥Jxxx♦QJ ♣Qx = 10HCP not quite enough to open 1♠

 

And why should responder consider correction the contract based on having 3 then 0 or having 4 then 1 KC answer. He must assume his partner revealed his answer already. Even if you have not mentioned void, you better think for improving bidding continuation carrying more information then aiming at the final.

[mgoetze]

Whatever form GIB uses for blackwood 03/14 or 14/30 or just 0,4/1/2/3, the respond of 5♣ is explained in mouseover rectangle.

 

I thought this doesn't apply to the express tournaments.

[georgi]

I thought this doesn't apply to the express tournaments.

 

Correct for Express, but you can see explanations of your calls if your partner is replaced with GIB. Supposedly GIB are only subs there, so you should handle with human partner like in normal tournament.

 

However you can approach the CC loaded for your pair.

It's written RKC 0314.

[Bbradley62]

Even the auction 1♠-4NT is RKC, even though most experts play this as ordinary Blackwood

[Citation needed]

[hv=lin=pn|emalka,~~M15158,~~M15156,~~M15157|st%7C%7Cmd%7C3S8QAH234TDTAC6JKA%2CS5TKH6D245QC457TQ%2CS39JH589JKAD69KC3%2C%7Crh%7C%7Cah%7CBoard%201%7Csv%7Co%7Cmb%7C1H%7Can%7CMajor%20suit%20opening%20--%205%2B%20H%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C4N%7Can%7CBlackwood%20%28H%29%20--%203%2B%20H%3B%2021%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C5H%7Can%7CTwo%20or%20five%20key%20cards%3B%20no%20queen%20--%205%2B%20H%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%3B%203%2B%20controls%20%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C6H%7Can%7C3%2B%20H%3B%2021%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CDT%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CS7%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CS9%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CST%7Cpc%7CSJ%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CH9%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CSQ%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CD8%7C]360|270[/hv]

 

Or, were you looking for a citation on the "most experts" part? There's an inconclusive discussion of that in the "which splinter" thread.

[Bbradley62]

Whatever form GIB uses for blackwood 03/14 or 14/30 or just 0,4/1/2/3, the respond of 5♣ is explained in mouseover rectangle.

GIB never uses 1430; please don't confuse the issue by mentioning that possibility.

[mgoetze]

Or, were you looking for a citation on the "most experts" part? There's an inconclusive discussion of that in the "which splinter" thread.

 

Yeah, for the "most experts" part. I mean, I find it hard to think of a hand where an expert would even have that auction, but that's another matter.

[barmar]

If I felt like searching, I'm sure I could find threads in General Bridge Forum and rec.games.bridge to support it. The hands where they would bid an immediate Blackwood are pretty rare freaks. But the general idea is that you don't need two different auctions that mean the same thing; if 1♠-2NT-<anything>-4NT is RKC, it's wasteful for 1♠-4NT also to be RKC.

[mgoetze]

If I felt like searching, I'm sure I could find threads in General Bridge Forum and rec.games.bridge to support it. The hands where they would bid an immediate Blackwood are pretty rare freaks. But the general idea is that you don't need two different auctions that mean the same thing; if 1♠-2NT-<anything>-4NT is RKC, it's wasteful for 1♠-4NT also to be RKC.

 

Good point, you've convinced me that 1M-4NT should show 6-6 in the minors. ;)

[pigpenz]

[hv=lin=pn|emalka,~~M15158,~~M15156,~~M15157|st%7C%7Cmd%7C3S8QAH234TDTAC6JKA%2CS5TKH6D245QC457TQ%2CS39JH589JKAD69KC3%2C%7Crh%7C%7Cah%7CBoard%201%7Csv%7Co%7Cmb%7C1H%7Can%7CMajor%20suit%20opening%20--%205%2B%20H%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C4N%7Can%7CBlackwood%20%28H%29%20--%203%2B%20H%3B%2021%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C5H%7Can%7CTwo%20or%20five%20key%20cards%3B%20no%20queen%20--%205%2B%20H%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%3B%203%2B%20controls%20%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C6H%7Can%7C3%2B%20H%3B%2021%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CDT%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CS7%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CS9%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CST%7Cpc%7CSJ%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CH9%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CSQ%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CD8%7C]360|270[/hv]

 

Or, were you looking for a citation on the "most experts" part? There's an inconclusive discussion of that in the "which splinter" thread.

on a hand like this cant 5♠ possibly be bid since you do have extra length, to compensate for the Q♥ doesnt seem likely

partner would bid 4NT without four hearts though life would have been easier if south had bid 2NT

[chasetb]

The main reason I bid 1NT was that I was expecting a NT contract, and so I wanted to play it (it was an express tournament by the way). None of GIB's bids came up with an explanation, so I had to guess at what GIB meant by its response. Since it had always come up as RKC before when I used it, I never actually looked at the GIB CC to see if it used 0314 or 1403. That was the main idea of this post.