Curious cue bid

[Antrax]

[hv=pc=n&s=s762hj5da743ckqj7&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1dp1hdp1npp]133|200[/hv]

In the diagram position, 2♣ is artificial, showing 3+♦, 4+♥, 19-22 TP and forcing to 2♥.

Why?

[steve2005]

good question. I'm kinda old fashioned that way. if I have a monster hand 19-22 I double and collect the huge penalty coming our way!

[Bbradley62]

In GIBberrish, because East's double shows the black suits, bidding 2♣ would be bidding opponent's suit? But it would be nice to know what distinguishes it from a 4♥ bid, either directly over the double or in the balancing position.

[1eyedjack]

I am uncomfortable about being denied an opportunity to bid a suit naturally just because an opponent has shown 4 cards in it.

Certainly there are occasions when a cue is more sensibly used as artificial.

And if I were going to bid it naturally I probably would not do it on just a 4 card suit, unless partner has also indicated length.

[georgi]

In the diagram position, 2♣ is artificial, showing 3+♦, 4+♥, 19-22 TP and forcing to 2♥.

Why?

 

First rebid 2♣ would be natural, later it probably looks like waiting bid.

 

1♦ - p - 1♥ - Double

2♣ -> Opener two rebid -- 4+ ♣; 4+ ♦; 3- ♥; 11+ HCP; 12-18 total points

 

GIB ignores at this moment 4+ 4+ promises in ambiguous situation where it could be one suiter only.

 

It will take in account certain 4+ cases like:

 

1♦ - 1♥ - Double - ?

here it wont bid 1♠ as natural as responder already emphasizes over this. ( it's explained as spades if human decides to bid so, but GIB will rather not ).

 

Also when there is unusual NT and opponent promises 5+ in some suit this suit is always prevented from natural meaning by anyone of opener+responder pair.

 

In upper diagram why would you like to compete once it's more likely to be true that Doubler has 4+♠ and 4+♣.

 

Over 1NT if Doubler had one suiter hand it would proceed. Passing leans to initial case.