[lycier]

---

I think there are two problems in this hand.

1- The explanations of 3♥ are not accurate.
Now that 3♥ says "Limited raise or better in ♠", its explanations are not like the original of 1♥,it should show non-minimum strength --- 14+hcp+,16+TPs.

2- There are some differences between 2♣ and 3♠,but Gib's respond are not same.

Hand-A

---

Hand-B

---

Now we can find that Gib's respond are not same after same 3♠.

[Bbradley62]

The first hand looks like something that wasn't quite cleaned up after installing Drury. 3♥ is a cuebid of opponent's suit, so it should show more than a minimum hand. Since North can invite game by bidding 3♠ and can simply jump to game with a somewhat stronger hand opposite partner's limit raise in spades, 3♥ must be showing slam interest, which is consistent with this North hand. The explanation is bad, not the bid. I don't like the explanation of 3♠ in that auction, since it is exactly the same as the description of 2♣, and South should be somehow limiting his possible holdings with each subsequent bid.

Humans, not GIB, chose to bid 3♠ directly over 1♠, just as they would have done it they had not been playing Drury (or had forgotten that they were). I don't know what the modern treatment of 1♠-3♠ is: should it be somehow preemptive, or is it better to use it to show a 4-card limit raise (and complete confidence in playing at the 3 level)?

I presume that the difference in North's responses to 3♠ can be attributed to these two humans playing in the MBC with different (basic) bots. This is to be expected on close calls.

[lycier]

Modern 2/1 approach:
1♠ --- 3♠ = preemptive raise with 0-6hcp and 4+card support.

If play Drury to show limited rase,it is unnecessary to play 1♠ --- 3♠ as limited raise.
Here Gib jump new suit is to play mixed raise.