[steve2005]

hand

Ok, yes I probably should bid 2♠(or however u show long spades with 2-way game tries) just in case Gib has 4♠ to find better 4-4 ♠ fit. However at mp my instinct is to not give info away and bid best likely game. Not that Gib makes leads using this info.

Gib showed constructive ♥ raise so 7-10 support pts.

Gib has 9 hcp and 3 tens not that matters, nice 6-card ♠ suit and a singleton with Qxx trump support.

And this is a constructive raise?! If I had that hand I'm thinking game and starting with 1♠.

[1eyedjack]

2S would not have shown 4 Spades. It would have shown an unspecified shortage (which you also have). One pair tried that and responder just leapt straight to 4H without enquiring into the location of the shortage, which is where the auction ended. Arguably South has enough to make another try, after that bid, but I can certainly understand passing.

One pair splintered with 4C over the 2H raise, and North self-propelled to slam via RKCB. Refreshing to see responder taking some positive action over a splinter with no wastage. But I do wonder whether there is some system wastage that uses both 2S and 4C to show splinters. Obviously 4C shows slam interest where 2S may be simply looking for game, but the way I play short suit trials is that they may have slam interest.

One pair (at least) attempted to investigate Spades by bidding 2N over 2H, which is he systemic bid to show (3+) Spades. Responder then just bid 4S which ended the auction. So at least they found Spades. I think that South really should have moved over 4S on that table.

But the point of the thread of course is how happy are we with the 2H raise.

I think that to stress that North has 9HCP AND a singleton is an overbid. Doubling up on the values of the singleton Q is not right. But on the other hand while I am loath to conceal a 4 card Spade suit, or even 5, in favour of raising partner's Hearts, I really don't think it right to do so on 6-3 shape.

The problem of course is that if you respond 1S and partner makes some rebid below 2H, then responder's retreat to 2H need not contain primary Heart support.

But give responder something like
Kxxxxxx
Qxx
x
xxx

where all of the "x"s are really small, and you have not really diminished the combined playing power of this hand at all. Would you then say that North is too strong for a 2H raise?

[steve2005]

I see your point, but playing constructive raises there is always the possibility of a raise containing primary support.

Also the presence of J♠ makes the spade suit much more interesting.

[Bbradley62]

So, what specifically is your suggestion for the programmers?

• Constructive raises should have a lower top limit
  
• GIB should count his total points differently
  
• GIB should not bypass 5+ spades to make a constructive heart raise
  
• GIB should not bypass 5+ spades to make a constructive heart raise with only 3 hearts
  
• something else

[cloa513]

steve2005, on 2015-May-15, 13:39, said:

hand

Ok, yes I probably should bid 2♠(or however u show long spades with 2-way game tries) just in case Gib has 4♠ to find better 4-4 ♠ fit. However at mp my instinct is to not give info away and bid best likely game. Not that Gib makes leads using this info.

Gib showed constructive ♥ raise so 7-10 support pts.

Gib has 9 hcp and 3 tens not that matters, nice 6-card ♠ suit and a singleton with Qxx trump support.

And this is a constructive raise?! If I had that hand I'm thinking game and starting with 1♠.

I found slam by cueing 4♣- if you pushing to game then you might as well consider slam possibility.

[lycier]

steve2005, on 2015-May-15, 13:39, said:

Gib has 9 hcp and 3 tens not that matters, nice 6-card ♠ suit and a singleton with Qxx trump support.

No.
I think you shouldn't discuss this issue since the hand evalueation of Gib are not same with what you said;
(3 tens indicates it can increase its values,nice 6-card suit indicates its length points etc)

[lycier]

cloa513, on 2015-May-16, 01:37, said:

I found slam by cueing 4♣- if you pushing to game then you might as well consider slam possibility.

Even though you really cuebid 4♣,I think Gib can't cuebid 4♦ showing its secondary round control in ♦,such a plan will fail.

[cloa513]

lycier, on 2015-May-16, 02:19, said:

Even though you really cuebid 4♣,I think Gib can't cuebid 4♦ showing its secondary round control in ♦,such a plan will fail.

Nope it succeeded. GIB either cued back or went straight to 4NT- I think the latter. This is the new free weekly tournament.

[1eyedjack]

lycier, on 2015-May-16, 02:19, said:

Even though you really cuebid 4♣,I think Gib can't cuebid 4♦ showing its secondary round control in ♦,such a plan will fail.

Scroll up to my earlier post.

[lycier]

---

Even Gib bidding 2♥ may be not a best option,your following 4♥ is worth discussing.
I think it is best to explore slam first,bidding 2nt instead of 4♥,2nt will say " Spade --- 3+♠,Q+ in ♠,17-18TPs " on Gib CC.
However I don't know how to bid next for Gib,I guess it will go :
2nt-- 3♠
4♣--- 4nt
--------6♠

Anyhow,I think 4♥ may be a inadequate description.Any idea?

[steve2005]

From a bridge standpoint I would consider hand worth limit raise and bid 1♠ followed by 3♥ if 2 of a minor rebid, but like Lycier says Gib doesn't count this way.

From a programing standpoint, I'm concerned there may be no hand with 3♥ and a constructive raise where Gib will bid 1♠. The extreme case being xxxxxxxxxx, xxx, void, void and the honors such that it would have constructive values by Gib's counting methods.

[steve2005]

1eyedjack, on 2015-May-15, 13:58, said:

One pair splintered with 4C over the 2H raise, and North self-propelled to slam via RKCB. Refreshing to see responder taking some positive action over a splinter with no wastage. But I do wonder whether there is some system wastage that uses both 2S and 4C to show splinters. Obviously 4C shows slam interest where 2S may be simply looking for game, but the way I play short suit trials is that they may have slam interest.

While I commend the result. I don't condone Gib's methods. If opener's diamonds and spades are reversed it isn't such a cold slam and bidding would have gone the same. I still would like to see a 4♦ cuebid out of Gib in such a situation (but I have a long wait) and let the big hand take control.

Is better slam prospects if you can diagnose the secondary ♠ fit early, but I wouldn't be thinking 6-4 ever.

[Bbradley62]

steve2005, on 2015-May-16, 16:06, said:

From a programing standpoint, I'm concerned there may be no hand with 3♥ and a constructive raise where Gib will bid 1♠. The extreme case being xxxxxxxxxx, xxx, void, void and the honors such that it would have constructive values by Gib's counting methods.

Agreed, it does appear that under the current algorithm there may be no hand with 3♥ and a constructive raise where GIB will bid 1♠. So, to help the programmers implement an improvement, you (or someone else) should make a very specific suggestion as to what the algorithm should be. Something like...

If GIB has constructive raise values

• with 4card heart support, he should make the constructive raise;
  
• with 3card heart support and at least "rebiddable" spades, he should bid 1♠
  
• with 3card heart support without "rebiddable" spades, he should make the constructive raise.

I don't honestly remember whether GIB plays fit-showing jumps by passed hands, but if so that maybe needs to be considered in the same algorithm.

[lycier]

Bbradley62, on 2015-May-16, 18:20, said:

I don't honestly remember whether GIB plays fit-showing jumps by passed hands, but if so that maybe needs to be considered in the same algorithm.

Yes,Gibs play fit-showing jump by passed hand,only for third or fourth seat.

[lycier]

Just now I also played this hand:

---

It seems I have no ability to get slam.

[Bbradley62]

lycier, on 2015-May-16, 19:49, said:

It seems I have no ability to get slam.

You might have a chance if the description of GIB's 4♠ bid matched his hand.

[steve2005]

Bbradley62, on 2015-May-16, 18:20, said:

Agreed, it does appear that under the current algorithm there may be no hand with 3♥ and a constructive raise where GIB will bid 1♠. So, to help the programmers implement an improvement, you (or someone else) should make a very specific suggestion as to what the algorithm should be. Something like...

If GIB has constructive raise values

• with 4card heart support, he should make the constructive raise;
• with 3card heart support and at least "rebiddable" spades, he should bid 1♠
• with 3card heart support without "rebiddable" spades, he should make the constructive raise.

I don't honestly remember whether GIB plays fit-showing jumps by passed hands, but if so that maybe needs to be considered in the same algorithm.

According to documentation Gib does play fit-jumps by passed hand.

As for figuring out suggestion when to bid 1♠ with constructive I'm not much help. Since Bergen raises showed up have rarely used constructive raises. Don't really understand how Gib deals with possible 3-4 card delayed raise after 1♥-1N-2m-2♥ or 1♥-1N-2♥ which is essentially the same problem your going to have to cover.

[lycier]

Bbradley62, on 2015-May-16, 20:14, said:

You might have a chance if the description of GIB's 4♠ bid matched his hand.

A chance? Where?
If Gib partner is 5323,Gib E lead ♦AK,it must fail.
We know guess is a worst part of the bridge game.

[Bbradley62]

lycier, on 2015-May-16, 22:05, said:

A chance? Where?
If Gib partner is 5323,Gib E lead ♦AK,it must fail.
We know guess is a worst part of the bridge game.

I said if the description matched the hand, not if the hand matched the description.

If North doesn't deny having a diamond control, maybe NS can reach the slam.

So, we file this under "cuebidding problems".