In these very close situations it is not obvious that either of you have overbid. 

If I were forced to apportion blame for being in too optimistic a contract then it would be the robot.  I think that the shape and strength make it suitable for a 1 response.  Then it would go:  1 -1 ; 1NT - 3 -?

The subltle difference is that the bot has allowed you to show a balanced hand at the 1 level.  Still pass or bid 4 is in the balance. 

Dosen't the bot play 2 way Drury where 2 is 3 card support and 2 is 4 card support.  Which I think is an advance on simple Drury.

When opener's rebid is above the same suit simple rebid it is called a reverse.  It says nothing about extra strength or length but has definite implications. 

Take 1 - 1 - 2 in a natural sequence.  Opener's "same suit rebid barrier" is 2 .  The rebid of 2 is above this barrier and so is a reverse.  The implications of this reverse is that opener needs extra strength to find the right contract if responder has 5 or 6 points.  Another general implication is that the first bid suit will be longer than the 2nd bid suit.  It seems (from the opinions given by kibs in Donnas iac session) that this 2nd implication is disputed for a 1-4-4-4 distribution.  Nevertheless the fact that it is a reverse has to be indisputable.

Take again 1 - 1 - 2 but this time you are playing transfer responses to 1 whereby 1 shows  !Hs; 1 shows  s; and 1 shows  !Ds.  This is still a reverse of course.  However, the implications are totally different.  The 2 bid implies a minimum opener with 5  !Cs + 4 s and of course is not forcing.  Responder will pass with most hands with fewer than 12 points. 

Ofcourse if you are playing 5542 then the 2 rebid would not imply 5 +4 .  This hand could have 4 and only 2  !Cs.  Nevertheless it is by definition a reverse. 

Hooray
Can I now declare 7NT team for April 3:  Wackojack + Veeree; kenberg + Ylee

OH! and I play Walsh response so with leass than a game force  and 4 or 5 diamonds and a 4 card major I will skip over the  suit and respond 1M.  If partner rebids 1N and I am weak I re-respond 2 which is a relay to 2 which I pass. So playing 2-way check back you can conveniently skip over a longer  suit in order to find a possible 4-4M fit and if that isnt the case then you relay to play in 2 .

I think you will find a 4-4 spade fit if there is one even when you rebid 1NT with 4 , 3 , 4 , D2 provided partner has 11+HCP using nmf.
 1    1
1NT     2
2      2
3      
Now you support your partner's 4 card  suit.

It is more obvious if you play 2 way check back which is incorporated into BBO Adv. After 1x-1y-1N
then 2 = 5+ 4 weak .  So you can sign off in 2 .
OR with an invite hand partner can next show his 4 card spade suit

1    1
1NT    2 (relay)
2     2 
3

If responder has a game forcing hand opener bids 2 after 1N So:
1    1
1NT    2 * Artificial game force
2 **  2
3      4

** opener shows delayed 3 card  support.  And now responder shows 4

Of course if you open 1NT (15-17) with a 4 card major and partner has 5-6 or even 7 high card points with a 4 cards in the same major you cannot find that 4-4 fit. 

Yes I think this is an entirely artificial problem

I was sitting with the hand holding    KJ3  and that was South.  I ducked smoothly and was already thinking could declarer have 4 small hearts and was working out what holding in hearts would declarer have to have to defeat the contract.  However declarer never tried the finesse and just took his 9 tricks. 

The answer is that if declarer has 8xxx then I can lead the K and follow with the Jack and partner cannot go wrong.  If however, declater has 9xxx not holding the 8 then I must lead the J.  Too much for me, I was preparing myself to lead the K .

And oh!  This hand is unusual in that the only 4 card suit is hearts and so would be opened a heart.  However, some Acol players with a balanced 4M +4m in tthe 15-19 range would bid up-the line just like in SA many with 12-14 and 4M+4m would bid up-the -line (and not rebid 1N).  So Acol is as different as SA in that respect.

A really tough hand to play and time the trump coup Ken.

The hands:

                                      AKJ4
                                      842
                                      AQT743
                                      void


Q86                                                      T97532                                   
Q9653                                                  7
KJ85                                                     2
T                                                          AQ643

                                    void
                                    AKJT
                                    96
                                    KJ98752
 
I am interested in the bidding and whether the take out of 3NT is justified. 
After 1 -(2 ) - 3 -3
Presumably partner's 3 is just forcing for 1 round
Presumably your bid of 3 is showing length, no extra strength and not forcing. 
Then you partner bids 3  .  Does that show now a game force?  Or forcing to 4minor?  (Avert your eyes Joe?)  I assume game force showing a good heart stop and not necessarily a 4 card heart suit.  Or could it be that partner thinks it is possible that he has a 4-4 heart fit with you.  If not, what is partner looking for?  3NT contract?  A cue looking for slam possibilities?  A waiting bid to get more info from you?
OK you bid 3NT saying that you do have spades stopped. Also your partner might reason that you have 4 spades because otherwise the opps have a 10 card  fit and would have raised spades.  So could deduce 4261 or 4360.  If these assumptions are correct and I have not missed a rival assumption, then your partner should definitely not have taken you out of 3NT.

PS This has the flavour of an MSC question and I did not have the time to try this month's quiz prefering to look real problems closer to home.

 

OK lets consider first the bidding:

                  K943
                  -
                  QJ642
                  KQ106

  AQ                          J105
  AQ92                      J10754
  983                        A10
  9543                      872

                8762
                K863
                K75
                AJ

At my table:
S   W   N   E
p   1♣   1♦   1♥
3♦   p   p   p
Sitting West with a min opener I would like to have competed to 3♥ but that would be showing a much stronger hand.  When 3♦ was passed out I was wondering if the opps had talked us out of a part score contract. 

So over to Ken’s table where Ken was sitting North.
S   W   N   E
1♦   p   1♠   p
2♠   p   4♠   p

As Ken says it is not the best of contracts.  Ken’s partner Carl decided to open this balanced 11 points with 1♦.  Was this wise? Well with 4-4 in the majors there is a case for opening 1m. (Andrew Robson and Gavin Wolpert have opened with 11 and 4-4 in the majors in their New tricks challenge matches) However I am not sure this would qualify because there is too much strength in the minors and not enough in the majors.  The “raison d’etre” for opening on 11 and 4-4 in the majors is that you are odds on to find partner with 4 cards in one of the majors and thus boss the contract.  In particular the cards in the boss suit spades are only 8 high and so not good enough.   

So when Carl raised Ken’s 1♠ response to 2♠, Ken with 11HCP and a void worth in theory an extra 5 it was natural to raise to 4♠. Ken eloquently describes how 4♠ could be made but was not.
So a loss of 5 imps instead of a poential gain of 7 imps.

The OCP bidding of this hand was interesting.  It went:

S          W                                                       N          E
p          1♦ (11-15 not 13-15 bal no 5CM)          p          1♥ (8-10 just points)
p          1NT (11-12 balanced)                           p          p

So they get into a 1NT contract that should go down missing a 5-4 heart fit that makes.  East's pass with a 5 card heart suit seems inexplicable.   This bad contract eventually made maybe because the Acol pair were decieved (and you might say unfairly) by the outlandish bidding.

At the other table South OCP had the opportunity to use a secret weapon of a mini (10-12)
S                 W              N                     E
1NT 10-12      p           2NT Xfer to ♦      p
3♦                p                   p                   p

It is not clear what the bid of 3 would mean after the 2NT transfer, and OCP got into a good contract.  So the OCP pair gained 6 imps on this deal perhaps because the Acol pair had not prepared a defence to the OCP's dubios 1 opening bid. 

2 other IAC pairs bid to 4 and neither of them found the winning line. 

Just one more to comment on: 

Another OCP pair bid like this:
  S   W   N   E
1NT   p   2    p
2    p   3NT   p
p      p       

Too lazy to find the 4-4 spade fit?  So this went 2 off

At the other table the Acol pair easily brushed aside the East-West OCP bidding.
S       W          N        E
p       1        p      1
p       2        x      p
2        p           p          p     

The modest contract of 2 made with an overtrick to give another 6imps to the Acol team