What is the intention with this bid

[thorvald]

[hv=url=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=pn%7CHuman%2CRobot%2CRobot%2CRobot%7Cst%7C%7Cmd%7C4S9HA65DKT86CAKQT6%2CSJT5H943DQJ42CJ82%2CSQ8743HJT2DA75C94%2CSAK62HKQ87D93C753%7Csv%7CN%7Cah%7CBoard%202%7Cmb%7C1C%7Can%7CMinor%20suit%20opening%20--%203%2B%20%21C%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%7Cmb%7C1D%7Can%7COne-level%20overcall%20--%205%2B%20%21D%3B%208-17%20HCP%3B%209-19%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C2D%7Can%7C3%2B%20%21D%3B%206-9%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C2N%7Can%7CInvitational%20to%203NT%20game%20--%205%2B%20%21D%3B%2017%20HCP%3B%2018-19%20total%20points%3B%20likely%20stop%20in%20%21C%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C3C%7Can%7C3%2B%20%21D%3B%206%2B%20HCP%3B%207-9%20total%20points%3B%20at%20best%20partial%20stop%20in%20%21C%3B%20forcing%20to%203N%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C3N%7Can%7C5%2B%20%21D%3B%204-%20%21H%3B%204-%20%21S%3B%2017%20HCP%3B%2019%20total%20points%3B%20stop%20in%20%21C%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CH9%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CS9%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CS7%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CST%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CSJ%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CDT%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CSQ%7Cpc%7CSA%7C]399|300[/hv]

 

South has a problem at first bid, and at the other table East was allowed to play 1♣. Our hero here bid 1♦, and North bid a fine 2♦. South bid an invitational 2N.

 

But the interesting bid is Norths 3♣, that according to the explanation denies a stopper in ♣, but nothing else as the 2♦ did limit the hand. 3♣ is forcing to 3N, but is the bot searching for a major contract?

[smerriman]

2NT is undefined for GIB, since 15-18 with stoppers would have overcalled 1NT, and stronger would have doubled first.

 

The catch-all rule for undefined 2NT bids is that they show exactly (24 - min partner has shown) HCP, so that partner can accept with more than a minimum.

 

Partner has shown 0 HCP to date, only 6-9 total points. So 2NT is considered to show exactly 24 HCP in your own hand.

 

Since 1♦ already limits you to 17 HCP for the 1 level overcall, the definition merges the contradiction of <= 17 with = 24 to result in = 17, even though it doesn't really mean it.

 

North can't bid 3NT because 17 + 7 < 25.

 

Every other bid is messed up because we're already way into undefined territory; for example, 3♦ is set to show rebiddable diamonds with exactly 6 total points.

 

So no, it's not trying to find a major fit, it just has no clue what anything means anymore.

 

If you see a 2NT bid show an exact number of HCP, don't bid it.

[TylerE]

"at best partial" != "denies"

[smerriman]

"at best partial" != "denies"

Well, unless you count Jxx or Qx as a stopper, then it does deny one..