[thorvald]

---

Seems like the bot forgetting the meaning of 3 !H

Thorvald

[iandayre]

Not really following this. Are you saying that GIB's definition of 3H is shortness? I don't think so. 3D was "cheaper minor" so did not promise Diamonds.

[thorvald]

 thorvald, on 2015-October-07, 16:11, said:

---

Seems like the bot forgetting the meaning of 3 !H

Thorvald

I am not sure what went wrong, but as GIB was playing with GIB I think it should know what 3!H was :-)

[steve2005]

 thorvald, on 2015-October-08, 17:03, said:

I am not sure what went wrong, but as GIB was playing with GIB I think it should know what 3!H was :-)

3♥ is weird. I'm assuming it's a slam try for diamonds. If so why pass 4♥? this almost assured to be a 4-1 maybe even 3-1 fit which tends to play poorly.

[barmar]

The ostensible meaning if this bid is 5+♣ 4+♥. In this case, it seems to be a punt because there's no applicable bid (the problems with strong 2♣ when you have minors is an acknowledge fault in standard bidding). 4♣ requires a stronger hand, 3NT requires a heart stopper. So it falls into a rule that just makes the cheapest rebid.

And it can't bid on past 4♥ when partner has shown a 2nd negative. It's essentially a gamble that East has a weak hand with long hearts.

[Stephen Tu]

I'd be strongly in favor of not showing 2nd negatives after 2c-2d-3c with long hearts, or spades for that matter. Just bid 3h/3s and get to game and try to make it. I don't think limiting the hand with 3d is worth it, it's not like you can bid 3d then 3h and end with a partial. And it's not like guaranteeing 4-7 with long hearts is really going to enable one to reach a lot of slams.

Just bidding 3h with long hearts regardless of strength would allow opener to bid 3nt without a heart stopper and try to make it, and with really long hearts can pull 3nt to 4h.

I think 2nd neg should only apply after 2c-2d-2M. Over 3m you need all the bids to intelligently bid the right game, and it's really almost impossible to stop in partial anyway. 2c openers with minor should be stronger than with major anyway, since 5m require 11 tricks.

[steve2005]

 barmar, on 2015-October-09, 13:57, said:

So it falls into a rule that just makes the cheapest rebid.

This seems to be a very poor meta-rule which led to an unmakeable 4-1 fit well below the par result.
Better would be make the cheapest bid possible consistent with your shape

[iandayre]

 steve2005, on 2015-October-09, 19:26, said:

This seems to be a very poor meta-rule which led to an unmakeable 4-1 fit well below the par result.
Better would be make the cheapest bid possible consistent with your shape

I must agree, 3S is far less of a lie than 3H and is sensible while 3H is not.