after takeout dbl pls bid 4cd major ahead longer minor

[Stephen Tu]

[hv=sn=stephtu&s=SAJ3HAJ2DAKJ7CQJ9&wn=GIB W&w=SQ54HKT74D543C743&nn=GIB N&n=S6HQ953DQ98CK8652&en=GIB E&e=SKT9872H86DT62CAT&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=2S(Weak two bid -- 6+ S%3B 10- HCP%3B 9+ total points)D(3-5 C%3B 3-5 D%3B 3-4 H%3B 2- S%3B 13+ total poi)P3C(4+ C%3B 10-13 total points)P3N(3-5 C%3B 3-5 D%3B 3-4 H%3B 2- S%3B 12-22 HCP%3B 13)P4H(4+ C%3B 5+ H%3B 10-13 total points)PPP]400|300[/hv]

 

- think GIB should bid 3H rather than 3c so it doesn't have to worry about missing a heart game over 3nt, I think this is std.

- 3nt should show stronger hand than "12-22 HCP". It should also cancel the distributional restriction on spades since I can be 19+ too strong for 2nt overcall. I'm thinking it should be something like 16+ hcp, spade stop.

- don't know why 4H shows 5+H 4+C. In my view this sequence wouldn't happen since 3c would be 4+ c, 3-H.

[ahydra]

I thought that with 16-18 and a spade stop, one bids 2NT. So X then NT here shows 19+.

 

ahydra

[Stephen Tu]

I thought that with 16-18 and a spade stop, one bids 2NT. So X then NT here shows 19+.

 

One doesn't bid 2nt with 100% of hands with spade stoppers and that range. Holding hands with only say Ax or Kx in spades, esp. with 4H, one often doubles instead of bidding 2nt, this caters to landing in suit partials when partner has weaker hands which often play better than 2nt when you have only a single stop & can't hold up.

 

But once partner shows values (good 8/9+?) by not bidding 2nt and showing a minor, some of those 17/18 counts with a spade stop are going to want to take a shot at 3nt hoping that 9 tricks are there before RHO can cash the rest of his major.

 

If one were *not* playing Lebensohl, or if partner had bid the weakness showing 2nt, then x then 3NT would show 19+.

[FM75]

Clearly it takes you for 2 spades and it has one. It does not have a spade winner. It is playing the "odds" based on a generating hands that match the bidding. In that light, the 4H pull looks quite sensible. How will your side find 5 clubs or 5 diamonds after it bids 3 hearts?

 

You doubled dealer into game. You have 13+, let's say, and it has a 7 hcp fit. At most you will collect one spade ruff unless opponents play the suit for you. 4th seat has not made a bid, but is not necessarily weak. What is the likelihood that there is a game? Very low at 3N, significantly higher, in the 3 other suits, but not probable. 3C pass or correct is fine for GIB.

 

So your partnership has 20, opener is likely to have about 8, leaving about 12 hcp available between your hand and dealer's partner. You have fewer "vacant" spaces for the additional points, since you have used up at least 3-4 cards for your call. You probably have 18 points on less than half of the auctions at the point that GIB bids.

 

It seems like you just want GIB to bid like you do, whether that is right or wrong. I suppose they could configure the GIBs to play the way their partner's do. But that means that they would be at best average, right? :)

[Stephen Tu]

Clearly it takes you for 2 spades and it has one. It does not have a spade winner. It is playing the "odds" based on a generating hands that match the bidding.

 

An initial sim of the takeout double can assume 2- spades since that is the most common case and is a reasonable starting point for the initial bid, or simulating what to do if West had bid something. But after the 3nt bid, this should no longer apply, since I can have 3 or 4 cd spades if I have a balanced 19+, it should readjust as the auction progresses and not assume opps have ten card fit on this auction. Ten card fit is rather unlikely since there was no raise by west.

 

In that light, the 4H pull looks quite sensible. How will your side find 5 clubs or 5 diamonds after it bids 3 hearts?

It won't, after a 3nt call. But that's OK. 3nt makes if I read the spade position. But if I don't bid 3nt, 5m can be found; if I rebid 4d it can raise, if I bid 3s it can bid 4c and I can raise, etc.

 

By bidding 3h and passing 3nt, one caters to the most likely makeable games, 4h and 3nt. By bidding clubs and pulling to 4h, although you may catch partner with 4 cd hearts, it's can work out pretty badly when partner has 3 hearts and 3nt makes but 4h doesn't. 5m is a lot of tricks to take, it's rather frequent that there are 9 tricks in NT, 10 tricks only in the minor, that's why players try so hard to reach 3nt with a minor fit.

 

You doubled dealer into game.

?? Making a takeout double of 2s isn't normally described as "doubling dealer into game" as you are expecting the double to be taken out the vast majority of the time. It's not making a penalty double. In this case it was off-shape because I had 19+ and was planning to show a balanced 19+ by bidding 3nt over 2nt, and was going to try 3nt over everything else also.

 

What is the likelihood that there is a game? Very low at 3N, significantly higher, in the 3 other suits, but not probable. 3C pass or correct is fine for GIB.

It's easier to take 10 tricks than 11. You have some values. Partner will raise 3h to 4h successfully more often than he will want to move over 3c. Needing 11 tricks, with 4 cd hearts partner may not move over 3 clubs with some hands where he would have chosen a successful raise of 3h to 4h, choosing to preserve a plus rather than gamble for a heart fit you may or not have. It's easier for partner to judge what to do when 3c denies a heart fit.

 

It's just pretty std to prioritize bidding unbid 4cd majors over takeout dbls over minors, because of the huge game bonus one gets playing & making 4 of the major. I am not advocating anything for GIB to play in this forum that is considered extremely weird by advanced/expert players.

 

It seems like you just want GIB to bid like you do, whether that is right or wrong.

I want GIB to bid something like "advanced/expert standard 2/1". Yes, that means like I suggest in these forums, I am suggesting that my way is "right" and "standard" given the mix of conventions GIB has chosen. I am posting things in areas where I think GIB did something clearly "wrong"; I don't bother to post borderline judgment issues where I'd do something different but GIB's bid is somewhat defensible, because I think at this stage it's more important for GIB's more egregiously bad definitions corrected. I also don't usually post things in the GIB where I like to play something non-std, because I know it's non-std and probably isn't right to put in GIB's system.

 

I am not world class or anything, but I think on average I bid better than GIB does, and a lot better than the average BBO player. If GIB bid like I did in more situations I think there would be far fewer complaints about its bidding than there are now.

 

Can you find some experts in print or on this forum that think it's standard to bid 3♣ in preference to 3♥, and pull 3nt to 4♥?

[FM75]

Clearly you missed my point. GIBs first choice is the one you originally dispute.

 

 

GIB bids based on what is the most likely and profitable outcome. Bidding systems are designed that way as well. It is normal to bid the longest of the other 3 suits in response to a takeout double. Some will bid a shorter major over a takeout of a minor, or shorter spades over takeout of hearts. It conserves space to do so, and does not sacrifice much in the way of points scored. It also reduces by one, the tricks needed to make the contract. That was not the situation on your deal.

 

1) You are most likely, as a pair, to hold a tad over 20 points as a partnership at GIB's first chance to bid.

2) You are most likely to be looking for the best part score at that time.

3) If you are 2=5=3=3, or longer hearts, you would most likely have bid hearts.

4) If you are 2=3=x=y, you will find at least an 8 card minor fit.

5) If you are 2=4=x=y, and you rebid hearts, then you should have a hand close to what you have. GIB has not lost the chance to bid a heart game, and you usually would have 5 hearts for the strong X and heart rebid.

6) You could also be bidding 1=x=y=z hands, though these are less likely than the ones mentioned (and a few others).

 

All of the above support the 3 club choice. But don't take my word for it. Don't wait to hear the opinions of experts. Opinions are like noses, everybody has one. Instead, do the science. Program GIB's hand, and the auction prior to his bid in dealer. Your hand should be random and meeting the normal definition of a takeout double of 2 spades. (The "Syntax" link on the dealer page describes how to do it.) The West hand should be suitable for a pass - which is not very limiting, when the takeout double has raised opponents to a vulnerable game.

 

See what the results show. I guarantee you that if you do it well, a club fit is your most probable fit.

 

You can extend it to GIBs second bid if you like, similarly. That is the second problem that you have raised.

 

*** Added

I think GIBs description show what is normal for the auction. They can't describe the route by which it arrived at the bid. You probably realize that.

[Stephen Tu]

Clearly you missed my point.

 

No, I got your point, I just don't think it's a particularly logical one.

 

GIB bids based on what is the most likely and profitable outcome. Bidding systems are designed that way as well.

No kidding. I am suggesting that it is more profitable in the long run to bid 3♥ when showing values rather than 3♣ when holding both suits, even if hearts are only 4 while clubs are 5.

 

5) If you are 2=4=x=y, and you rebid hearts, then you should have a hand close to what you have. GIB has not lost the chance to bid a heart game, and you usually would have 5 hearts for the strong X and heart rebid.

Rebidding hearts by the doubler shows 5+, period. You are dreaming if you are saying that doubler is rebidding hearts on 4. If you are saying advancer should only raise with 4 then you are making life difficult when doubler does have the 5+ heart hand. So you absolutely can lose heart games this way, unless you are psychic at guessing when to pull 3nt.

 

Also, the main thing is that when partner has some 2443 or 3433 (no spade stop) type of hand, moderate extra values, *he may pass 3♣*, while he would have raised 3♥ successfully. Because bidding over 3♣ trying to find a heart fit or 3nt may lead back to 4♣, and you are a level higher with no game bonus compensation for the times things break badly and you go down one. It takes a bit more strength to move over 3♣ than over 3♥ because of the distortion of the scoring table.

 

Look, if the only question was which partial to play, I agree that choosing clubs makes sense. If advancer is much weaker with the same shape, I'd be OK with bidding 2nt lebensohl and passing 3♣. But if showing values, I think it's clear to bid hearts. Bridge is heavily geared to finding major suit games because of the scoring table. Finding these 4♥ games is going to win a lot more than one loses when 3♥ goes down one while 3♣ makes.

 

But don't take my word for it. Don't wait to hear the opinions of experts. Opinions are like noses, everybody has one.

 

But the opinions of experts tend to be more reliable than those of other people, they base their opinions on a larger database of hands they play than most, they recommend what works more often.

 

The West hand should be suitable for a pass - which is not very limiting, when the takeout double has raised opponents to a vulnerable game.

I don't know what your deal is with "doubling them into game". This is a takeout double, not a "doubling into game" situation. West with a fit doesn't *have* to raise immediately, that's true, he'll get another chance, but with a fit he *should* raise immediately most of the time, to give N/S problems. If he is going to bid 4♠ he should do so immediately; the chance of getting passed out in 2♠-dbl is zero, and bidding 4♠ can leave the opponents with a difficult guess since he can be doing it either as a sac or expecting to make. If he waits to raise, and lets N/S assess their values and fit or not, N/S are far less likely to do the wrong thing over 4♠. "Doubling the opps into game" isn't going to be part of anyone's decision making process on this hand, I don't understand why you are mentioning it. Nobody is close to passing 2s-x out.