University of IAC > 2/1 Talk

Trying to play with GIBs, a minor rant

(1/3) > >>

onoway:
This is in the endless hands since I find trying to do anything on the web version infuriatingly uncooperative, clumsy and cluttered:
P has  !C 875    !D AKQ9  !H Q9    !S J765
I hold  !C AQ42    !D J865  !H A2   !S A32

 Not vul opps pass throughout. P opens 1 !D. I respond 2 !C forcing
P then bids 2NT  to which I respond 3 !D to offer option of 3NT or  !D
P then bids 4 !C!  I gnash my teeth and think ugly thoughts about GIBs and bid 4 !D
At this point Gib bids 5 !C.

 I pretty much have to assume it has some decent  !C to rebid them or is this some sort of cue bid trying to get to slam? Why on earth would that be a possibility when neither of us are showing anything but minors and neither of us are showing any extras?  How in the world can it justify rebidding a lousy three card suit when it has the 4 card  !D suit with the three top honours and we have at least an 8 card fit?   In this case I suppose I should have ignored the  !D fit, just bid 3NT and hope that the K !S is finessable.

OliverC:
!S J765
!H Q9
!D AKQ9
!C 875

!S A32
!H A2
!D J865
!C AQ42

I find this kind of situation a bit of a non-issue, I'm afraid, Pam. It's your 2 !C bid that is the main problem here, in my view.

Playing 2/1, I respond 2 !D over 1 !D without a nano-second's hesitation and responding 2 !C is grossly dangerous and misleading, in my view, especially when you rebid 3 !D over 2NT, because that is, in my view, definitely saying "I fancy something other than or more than 3NT". Would you not be playing inverted Minor Suit Raises if you're playing 2/1? Why 1 !D - 2 !C rather than 1 !D - 2 !D?

Now the sequence goes:
1 !D - 2 !D(inverted)
2 !S/2NT - 3NT

3NT may well fail here (and probably will) but, crucially, there is no better game contract available here. 5 !D needs a huge amount of luck and 4 !S needs the same luck in both Majors that you're hoping for in Hearts in 3NT. If 3NT fails, you just shrug your shoulders and move onto the next hand, safe in the knowledge that 80% of the room are probably in the same contract.

Bidding Systems are not about reaching the optimum contract on a given hand (probably 1NT or 2 !D on these cards), but about reaching the best contract you can realistically achieve, given your system. Nobody is going to be stopping short of a game on these cards and 3NT is the game contract with the best chance of making, compared to 4 !S or 5 !D.

If I was playing 2/1 and the bidding started 1 !D - 2 !C - 2NT - 3 !D, I would not be rebidding 3NT over 3 !D and would also be showing my tolerance for Clubs, safe in the "knowledge" that you had a massive Minor 2-suiter and a hand unsuited to playing in 3NT.

kenberg:
An interesting hand. Much of what I say will repeat what Oliver said.

I might or might not bid 2C with your hand over the 1D opening, but if I did then after partner bids 2NT I would raise to 3NT.

If you want to offer partner the option of playing in diamonds, the time to do that is on the first round of bidding. After 1D-2D the possible strains are Ds and NT, at least that is barring some very strange development.

Let's look at what is known after pard opens 1D. Partner has at least as many diamonds as clubs.  You have the same number of diamonds as clubs. Therefore, the partnership has at least as many diamonds as clubs.  So, if 5+ D is to be considered as a contract, you might as well say so on the first round. To put it another way, after partner opens 1D it is very unlikely that you have a 9 card club fit but you might have a 9 card diamond fit. So forget about trying to play in clubs.

If the auction begins, as it did, 1D-2C-2NT I just raise to 3NT. As O says, bidding 3D over 2NT sends a different sort of message than you want. Partner will wonder: If she wanted to play in Ds, why did she not just bid 2D over 1D?

So:  While I do not feel as strongly as Oliver does about not bidding 2C, I would either raise Ds immediately or, after 1D-2C-2NT, I would raise 2NT to 3NT.

A word about the bots. I played three days in the recent online tourney with the bots. As near as I can recall, we had no bidding misunderstandings. Not that we always ended in the best contract, but I think I had no problems with the bots that I would not have had with humans. Imo, their bidding is (usually) reasonable enough. Their defense, otoh, is truly weird. This worked in my favor more often than it worked against me since the tourney rotates the hands so that the human has the most hcps. So usually the bots are on defense. More than a couple of hopeless hands came in thanks to the bot's weird defensive ideas. But I really cannot recall any complaint I had with their bidding throughout the 72 boards.

One more thought. I mentioned elsewhere that I am thinking of renting the dollar bot for the day, starting a teaching table, sitting all four bots at the table, and have them play the 72 boards from the tourney just to see how my choices would compare with the bot who replaced me. You could try that with these hands and see what the bots do. I would bet it goes 1D-2C-2NT-3NT. But I might be wrong, of course.

PS.  It is good to see someone other than me putting up a hand!


ADDED:   I just loaded the hands you gave, randomly assigning the other cards to the opponents.
The auction was 1D-2D-2NT-3NT

Result: Making with one overtrick! Fortunately, the bot on opening lead held the K of H and lead a heart, riding to the Q.  I did place the EW cards randomly but I suspect many other random placements would lead to going down.


I am definitely NOT claiming that the bots are the final word but it's interesting to see what they do. Here they take a direct route to 3NT.

onoway:
Ok I suppose I am used to more of a conversation with partner than the bots offer, blame my Goren background which insists on a somewhat less arbitrary behaviour unsuited to duplicate I suppose. You'd think after all this time on BBO I'd have got over that but early conditioning dies reluctantly. The bots drive me crazy a lot of the time, in particular when their bid announces such things as it is showing the king of Diamonds, which happens to be in MY hand.

kenberg:
Pam, try this as an exercise. Imagine that you are playing with your clone. So you both think the same. How would the auction go, and why?

Playing with Goren, I am less than certain he would open your partner's hand. Goren played pretty strong openings. If it began 1D-2C he definitely would not rebid 2NT at least as I remember it. 1D-2C-2NT showed  something extra.
Goren opened 4 card majors but not Jxxx. Moreover, with two four card suits and 3-2 in the others he opened the four card suit that lay below the doubleton so he would open 1D (if he opened at all) even if the spades were better and the diamonds weaker.

But it has been a long tine since I played Goren. So really I think the profitable question is: How would you and your clone bid the hand?

In particular, why not 1 !D - 2 !D?

Discussion of inverted minors is much needed. At least for diamonds, here is how I see it: 1 !D - 2 !D is forcing for one round. The 2 !D bidder might have less than game forcing values. If so he will have 5+ diamonds and plans to bid 3 !D on the next round. The 3 !D can be and often will be passed.  If the 2 !D bidder has only 4 diamonds then he has game forcing values, as is the case here. So, after 1 !D - 2 !D the final contract will be game or slam, and will be in diamonds or NT. Here it will be in NT, and this might or might not make. With more shapely hands, you might end in 5 !D. But, after 1 !D - 2 !D there is no possibility that you will end in clubs. And with these hands, a 12 count opposite 15, you will end in game not slam. Ending in game not slam, and ending in diamonds or NT, seems like what we want.

When the minor is clubs rather than diamonds there is more to be said for insisting that 1 !C - 2 !C promise five cards since with only four clubs and invitational values you surely have a hand that can either bid a suit at the one level or else a hand where you can bid 2NT.

Here is what the GIB noes say about 1 !D and afterward:

"Usually 4 unless 4432. Opens 1♦ with 4-4 in the minors. 2♦ response is forcing, inverted. 2♣ response is forcing for one round, but not game force."

This of course is not enough guidance. Some comments on it:

I am pretty sure the Gibs now play 1 !D - 2 !C as game forcing. I'm not positive, but pretty sure.
But "2♦ response is forcing, inverted" further clarification.
As I recall, the Gibs play 1 !D - 2 !D - 2NT as passable. BWS plays it as a one round force.
As noted, I gave the hand to the Gibs, and indeed it began 1 !D - 2 !D so they do raise on 4.

Goren of course did not do inverted minors so that option was out. I assume that you do use inverted minors. So, why not? Partner opens 1 !D, you look at your hand. Ending in game or slam, and ending in diamonds or NT, seems like what we want.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page