Bbradley62 Posted December 26, 2011 Report Share Posted December 26, 2011 [hv=lin=pn|tslamt,~~M13212,~~M13210,~~M13211|st%7C%7Cmd%7C2S3457KAH5QD3JQAC7%2CS2HKD2789TC268TJA%2CS68QH2678TD6C359Q%2C%7Crh%7C%7Cah%7CBoard%204%7Csv%7Cb%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C1H%7Can%7CMajor%20suit%20opening%20--%205%2B%20H%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7C1S%7Can%7COne-level%20overcall%20--%205%2B%20S%3B%208-17%20HCP%3B%209-%7Cmb%7C2C%7Can%7CFree%20bid%20--%205%2B%20C%3B%2011-%20HCP%3B%2011-12%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20%7Cmb%7C2S%7Can%7C3%2B%20S%3B%206-10%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C3S%7Can%7C5%2B%20S%3B%2017-%20HCP%3B%2018%20total%20points%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C4S%7Can%7C3%2B%20S%3B%206-10%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7Cd%7Can%7C5%2B%20H%3B%2021-%20HCP%3B%2014-22%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cpc%7C]360|270[/hv]Shouldn't the 4♠ bid show more than the 2♠ bid did? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloa513 Posted December 26, 2011 Report Share Posted December 26, 2011 [hv=lin=pn|tslamt,~~M13212,~~M13210,~~M13211|st%7C%7Cmd%7C2S3457KAH5QD3JQAC7%2CS2HKD2789TC268TJA%2CS68QH2678TD6C359Q%2C%7Crh%7C%7Cah%7CBoard%204%7Csv%7Cb%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C1H%7Can%7CMajor%20suit%20opening%20--%205%2B%20H%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7C1S%7Can%7COne-level%20overcall%20--%205%2B%20S%3B%208-17%20HCP%3B%209-%7Cmb%7C2C%7Can%7CFree%20bid%20--%205%2B%20C%3B%2011-%20HCP%3B%2011-12%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20%7Cmb%7C2S%7Can%7C3%2B%20S%3B%206-10%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C3S%7Can%7C5%2B%20S%3B%2017-%20HCP%3B%2018%20total%20points%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C4S%7Can%7C3%2B%20S%3B%206-10%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7Cd%7Can%7C5%2B%20H%3B%2021-%20HCP%3B%2014-22%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cpc%7C]360|270[/hv]Shouldn't the 4♠ bid show more than the 2♠ bid did?The 4♠ definitely should have more than a 2 ♠ raise- which that hand so marginally has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgi Posted December 26, 2011 Report Share Posted December 26, 2011 It looks like 3♠ invite should be accepted with upper range of the initial raise - like 8-10TP. It could be corrected. GIB should differentiate the meaning of the call and respectively partner when the invite is accepted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted December 27, 2011 Report Share Posted December 27, 2011 I think this is one of those cases where GIB can't describe "A or B". The raise could be 6+ with extra length, or 8-10 with only 3 cards. When combining this, it ends up describing the minimum of each attribute. 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.