Borderline? #2

[1eyedjack]

[hv=sn=1eyedjack&s=SK4HK98764DAK9C63&wn=Robot&w=SAQ95HQJ5DQT63CT7&nn=Robot&n=S32HAT32D754CKQJ2&en=Robot&e=SJT876HDJ82CA9854&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=P1H(Major%20suit%20opening%20--%205+%20%21H%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B)1S(One-level%20overcall%20--%205+%20%21S%3B%208-17%20HCP%3B%209-19%20total%20points)2S(Cue%3A%20limit%20raise%20or%20better%20--%203+%20%21H%3B%2011+%20total%20points)D(3+%20%21S%3B%207-9%20total%20points)3H(5+%20%21H%3B%2011+%20HCP%3B%2012-13%20total%20points)PP4S(3+%20%21S%3B%207-9%20total%20points)PPD(3+%20%21H%3B%2012+%20HCP%3B%2012-%20total%20points)PPP&p=CKCAC3C7S8S4S9S2H5H3SJH4STSKSAS3CTCJC4C6D7D8DKD3DAD6D4D2D9DTD5DJC9H6S5C2DQHTC8H7HQH2S7H8C5H9SQCQHJHAS6HK]400|300[/hv]MP, Instant, 33

 

Still smarting from borderline #1, this was the next deal. Another borderline one, so perhaps just for interest rather than "reporting" purposes.

 

Once North doubles there is no winning action available to South, assuming that 5H gets whacked, although (the only) two pairs who managed to get into 5H survived undoubled for a huge score.

 

Of possible interest is how the earlier version of GIB handled the hand after the same decisions by South. North raised 3H to 4H, and then passed out East's 4S bid.

 

I confess that X of 2S by East is not a call that I would have found, but that is a system thing I guess. Not sure that I would have bid 1S either, but the earlier version of GIB did also.

[iandayre]

The interesting question to me here is, how would GIB treat a pass by you over 2S as opposed to your 3H call? I play 3H as the weakest action, would pass here which is more encouraging.

 

It's also unclear why E is fooling around doubling the 2S cue bid, an action which should indicate defense. Should go directly to 4S.

[Bbradley62]

The interesting question to me here is, how would GIB treat a pass by you over 2S as opposed to your 3H call? I play 3H as the weakest action, would pass here which is more encouraging.

Based on the description provided for 3♥, GIB agrees with you.

 

It's also unclear why E is fooling around doubling the 2S cue bid, an action which should indicate defense. Should go directly to 4S.

If the double shows a simple raise and a 3♥ cuebid would show an invitational raise, I wonder whether 3♠ and 4♠ even exist in GIB's arsenal.

[1eyedjack]

If 3H is weaker than Pass, does that make North's double after 3H more reasonable?

[Bbradley62]

If 3H is weaker than Pass, does that make North's double after 3H more reasonable?

I don't see how, based on his later jump to 4♠. If East intends to be in 4♠ anyway, why let NS exchange information on the way there?

 

PS: I also think the 4♠ bid should have a better description than simply the same one as his earlier double.

[1eyedjack]

I don't see how, based on his later jump to 4♠.

I think you are confusing players here. I fear that clarity gave way to brevity.

 

I was querying N/S options, neither of whom "later jump[ed] to 4S".

 

While E/W bidding certainly deserves criticism, the focus of the OP was on North's decisions in light of South's.

 

My point was to speculate that if South is too weak for 3H according to system then North's subsequent action becomes even less reasonable than the borderline acceptable as originally suggested.

[Bbradley62]

I think you are confusing players here. I fear that clarity gave way to brevity.

 

I was querying N/S options, neither of whom "later jump[ed] to 4S".

 

While E/W bidding certainly deserves criticism, the focus of the OP was on North's decisions in light of South's.

 

My point was to speculate that if South is too weak for 3H according to system then North's subsequent action becomes even less reasonable than the borderline acceptable as originally suggested.

Yeah, I misread that. I thought we were talking about East's odd double.

 

I expect that North's final double is based on sims, so it's not something the programmers have much (if any) control over.

[iandayre]

Tough hand. I wonder how many players of any skill level would find the double-dummy correct action of allowing E-W to play 4S undoubled.

[1eyedjack]

Tough hand. I wonder how many players of any skill level would find the double-dummy correct action of allowing E-W to play 4S undoubled.

It probably doesn't mean anything, but in the traveller 7 out of 15 pairs defended 4S undoubled. For as long as it is available it is here:

 

http://www.bridgebas...rname=1eyedjack