The dreadful... GERBER

[kenberg]

I  mentioned a 1972 Kantar book and now I looked up the (somewhat) more recent 1998 edition of Kantar's Roman Key Card Blackwood. On page 160 he explicitly includes 1 !s - (2 or 2 or 2 ) - 2NT - 4 as a Gerber auction. This does not prove that it is a gerber auction, but it does show that a preety decent player regards it as a gerber auction.

Full disclosure: Kantar and I were both born in Minneapolis in the 1930s so maybe it's a Minnesota thing.  Or maybe, like me, Kantar still prefers a stick shift to an automatic transmission. Anyway.


Mostly I think my point would be that almost all conventions need discussion as to when they are n  or off, and we need to go over the details of how they are played.  For example, in the lesson today, or I should say the terrific lesson today, an auction began 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 4 and so on. Since 3 showed a self-sufficient suit, perhaps some would regard 4 as minorwood. Or, if they do not play minorwood there, then some would regard the 4 as kickback.  In the auction they had, neither minorwood nor kickback was intended, or at least I don't think so. I have avoided both minorwood and kickback  on the grounds that, in my experience, they are even more prone to misunderstandings than gerber. No doubt a case can be made for playing the 4 as minorwood, a case can be made for 4 as kickback, but without some detailed discussion there is apt to be confusion. I need to come to grips with various ace asking calls and this might give me the shove I need.

Which, to me, means that the lesson today was very useful. And the varied play problems that arose were most interesting! I thank you for those hands.

[Curls77]

Me again, in war with Gerber 

Yesterday during IAC Team Match, this hand happened. All red, west deals:
N: T86 A52 AKJ54 A9
S: AKQ KT98 Q8 KQ83
On both tables EW remained silent, and auctions were (alerts in brackets):
Table 1: 1N-4C (gerber) ; 4H (3? no idea)-6NT
Table 2 did not alert anything: 1N-4C ; 4D-4N ; 5D-5H; 5N

Even tho responder is balanced, should not they try for heart fit first? They know they have enough HCP for small slam, and that opener MUST have at least one diamond high honor for their opening. So why go thru Gerber?
I will risk being silly, because without idea how investigate grand, I would bid this as: 1N-2C; 2D-6N.

PS: Hope this time i managed miracle and given 13 cards to both NS 

[kenberg]

I wouldn't expect an alert for Gerber, at least not in 1NT - 4 . That was Gerber in 1950s Goren, so it seems sort of like Stayman. We don't alert 1NT - 2   unless it is some variant of Stayman.

Now would I try for the grand? Oh, maybe. If so, it would begin 1NT - 2 - 2 - 3 .   A grand is a grand, no reason to fret if it is in clubs. With the actual hands we probably won't find the grand, and it's a very iffy grand if North's diamonds are AK654, perfectly consistent with the 1NT opening. Any time that a grand becomes iffy when I change a J to a 6 I don't mind missing the grand.


But suppose:

N:  T8      A52     AK65   A965
S:  AKQ   KT98    Q8      KQ83

Now we have 3+2+3+3=11 top card tricks but if the clubs are 3-2 we get  all 4 club tricks and a ruff for 13.
So trying for a grand is not crazy but with "only" a 19 count we need to find a suit fit for it to be a likely make.

Playing with my clone the auction might go 1NT - 2 - 2 - 3 - 3NT - 6 NT, or maybe  1NT - 2 - 2 - 3 - 3 - 6 NT   

[Masse24]

I wouldn't expect an alert for Gerber, at least not in 1NT - 4 . That was Gerber in 1950s Goren, so it seems sort of like Stayman. We don't alert 1NT - 2   unless it is some variant of Stayman.

Now would I try for the grand? Oh, maybe. If so, it would begin 1NT - 2 - 2 - 3 .   A grand is a grand, no reason to fret if it is in clubs. With the actual hands we probably won't find the grand, and it's a very iffy grand if North's diamonds are AK654, perfectly consistent with the 1NT opening. Any time that a grand becomes iffy when I change a J to a 6 I don't mind missing the grand.


But suppose:

N:  T8      A52     AK65   A965
S:  AKQ   KT98    Q8      KQ83

Now we have 3+2+3+3=11 top card tricks but if the clubs are 3-2 we get  all 4 club tricks and a ruff for 13.
So trying for a grand is not crazy but with "only" a 19 count we need to find a suit fit for it to be a likely make.

Playing with my clone the auction might go 1NT - 2 - 2 - 3 - 3NT - 6 NT, or maybe  1NT - 2 - 2 - 3 - 3 - 6 NT

Pretty much this ^^^ with all the maybes.

Although 3 generally promises 5+ (and by inference four of the other major) I probably trot it out in an attempt to find the grand. But I end in 6NT.

Gerber at both tables was, in my opinion, premature. The 4 answer to Gerber at the first was . . . puzzling. Even more so for that responder!

[Curls77]

I wouldn't expect an alert for Gerber, at least not in 1NT - 4 . That was Gerber in 1950s Goren, so it seems sort of like Stayman. We don't alert 1NT - 2   unless it is some variant of Stayman.

Let's not forget that in IAC we ask that all artificial bids are alerted, main reason is that we are teaching club, players and kibs learn with every hand. there is no "over"alert, pard never sees any.
Gerber happens rarely, so it wont hurt if it is alerted, and its continuations. As I understand most nowdays reply to it as 1430 where 5H= bad 2 and 5S= good 2. Seems neither table really knew for sure how to go on after darn 4C.

[kenberg]

I wouldn't expect an alert for Gerber, at least not in 1NT - 4 . That was Gerber in 1950s Goren, so it seems sort of like Stayman. We don't alert 1NT - 2   unless it is some variant of Stayman.

Let's not forget that in IAC we ask that all artificial bids are alerted, main reason is that we are teaching club, players and kibs learn with every hand. there is no "over"alert, pard never sees any.
Gerber happens rarely, so it wont hurt if it is alerted, and its continuations. As I understand most nowadays reply to it as 1430 where 5H= bad 2 and 5S= good 2. Seems neither table really knew for sure how to go on after darn 4C.

A line has to be drawn somewhere. If I double a 1 opening on my right I do not explain that it is for take-out, I don't alert a 2 response to 1NT. I do alert transfers including, if it is 1NT - 2 I explain whether it actually shows clubs or it shows one minor maybe , maybe . (I prefer that it shows clubs but I will play it either way).  I probably would alert Gerber although in 1NT - 4 I don't know what else it would be, and if someone is not familiar with Gerber then clearly just saying  Gerber would not suffice. I cannot recall this ever leading to trouble.

Unless I have discussed it with someone, I would expect standard responses, meaning that 4 shows no aces or four aces, 4 shows 1, 4 =2 and 4NT=3. If Charles Goren (1950s), Larry Cohen (regularly updated) and Bridge World Standard (2017)  all agree (they do)  that these are the responses, how wrong can it be? I recommend caution when someone tells you that they are giving you the "nowadays" responses unless they also give you references. You can trust me on Goren (I have his book), you can look up BWS 
https://www.bridgeworld.com/indexphp.php?page=/pages/readingroom/bws/bwscompletesystem.html#III   
and you can see Cohen at
https://www.larryco.com/bridge-articles/gerber
to see that they all recommend what I regard as the standard responses. Oh, also Richard Pavlicek
 http://www.rpbridge.net/7g19.htm#73 
 I expect I can easily find others.

There are a lot of variations in bridge conventions and this can be a problem, but I have never had a misunderstanding with Gerber responses.

[jcreech]

Like Ken, I have never had an issue with my partner and a Gerber auction, with one exception.  The exception is something that just does not come up often.  The auction is something like 2 - 2 ; 3NT - 4 .  It is not often that you have an auction where you open 2 and rebid 3NT.  So what is 4 in that auction?  Most agree that it is Stayman.  For many years, the ace asking convention after 3NT has been 5 (Super Gerber). 

Where I have seen confusion has been when my partner and I have faced an unusual 4 bid (not part of a NT auction, but intended as ace asking).  The opponents did not have the problem - they had explicitly made the agreement - my partner and I did because it was not clear that 4 was artificial.

[kenberg]

Yes, I was, for the moment, only looking at 1NT - 4 . For the more general situation I'll just quote from my first post on this thread:

"As with any convention, if you are going to play it you have to agree when it is on and when it is off.  I play weekly, more or less, with Carl (not a BBO player). Our agreement is that 4 is gerber if it is a jump made directly after a natural NT bid. So: 1 - 2  - 2NT - 4 is a jump to 4 over the natural rebid of 2NT. That makes it Gerber for us.  I have been playing it that way more or less forever, and most everyone I know plays it that way also."

It is certainly the case that others have  different ideas as to when 4 is Gerber and when it isn't. In a pick-up game I would probably avoid using Gerber in the auction  1 - 2 - 2NT - 4 .  It's true that I play that as Gerber but it does not follow that it would be understood as being Gerber if we have not discussed it. For most players, what we want is a rule that is simple and unambiguous. Must be a jump, and must be directly over a natural NT, this seems simple and unambiguous.

Of course this issue is not confined to Gerber: 1NT - 2 - 2 - 4NT? Natural with five hearts and slam invitational values, in my opinion. 1NT - 4 - 4 -4NT sets hearts as trump and asks for keys. We don't need two ways to do the same thing so 1NT - 2 - 2 - 4NT is natural.    Would I be confident with a pick-up partner? No, of course not.  If we have not discussed such matters, we should not be surprised when a misunderstanding occurs.

Let me be clear, at the risk of being repetitious. I am not saying that I have presented the correct way to play Gerber, I am saying that with almost all conventions there is no one expert way, no one common way, and really no one right way. So, without discussion, there is apt to be misunderstanding.  I think some choices are better than others, but the really bad choice is for one person to be playing it one way and the other person to be playing it a different way. 

[dirtysox88]

Hondo teaches that there are 5 situations where Gerber applies:
1 - 1NT-4C
2 - 2NT-4C
3 - 2C-2D-2NT-4C
4 - 1X-1Y-1NT-4C
5 - 1X-1Y-2NT-4C
it may not be standard but i have adopted it myself for simplicity's sake.
in the hand under discussion assuming 2D was game forcing you should jump to 4D
at your 2nd turn to set the trump suit, partner ought to show a control if he has any tolerance
 for D's