[thepossum]

I found a hand that I mentioned above. Can anyone explain this use of Gerber please? I could understand if it went on to ask for Kings but it didnt. Is it just a bidding glitch or is there any reason using it this way? Is it an effective deceptive bid suggesting there is a missing Ace?

It does actually make 7, not that you would likely bid it (with my limited systems), even though a double dummy solver said we missed it and were well off the par score One table did make 7 after a questionnable Soloway 2 diamond bid, and one human pair managed to get to 7C clubs after a 2C opening - I'm happier with that outcome

This hand is why I answered "Other" above. My main obstacle for using it is that (along with other fairly rare conventions) I forget they exist

---

[smerriman]

Putting aside the odd 2NT bid, the explanation for 4♣ is that GIB doesn't understand how to bid.

[thepossum]

smerriman, on 2020-October-15, 20:23, said:

Putting aside the odd 2NT bid, the explanation for 4♣ is that GIB doesn't understand how to bid.

I don't get what is wrong with 2NT invite with the correct point range. Maybe I learned to play Bridge somewhere else where describing a hand failry accurately and early on and not messing about was the norm I accept many years ago I may not have felt comfortable biidding that as a no trump hand - but sometimes you have to hope it works out. Actually maybe I'm a point out - just noticed - I cant always count and sometimes just bid on how I feel at the time or how the hand feels - actually it was 11-12 balanced invite.

[Zelandakh]

thepossum, on 2020-October-15, 20:45, said:

I don't get what is wrong with 2NT invite with the correct point range. Maybe I learned to play Bridge somewhere else where describing a hand failry accurately and early on and not messing about was the norm

A 2NT response eats up a lot of bidding space so it needs to send a fairly precise message. In general, you want to have decent stoppers in every suit, which JT is not really. I would far prefer a 1♦ response, after which the bidding will continue 2♠ - 3♣; 3NT. I am not certain enough of the GIB system to know whether 4♣ or 4NT is the right bid after that but the chances are that you will end up in 6NT anyway, so while I would not have responded 2NT, in the end it cannot be said to have been a bad decision. GIB's 4♣ call though; yeah, pretty bad.

[thepossum]

Zelandakh, on 2020-October-15, 20:56, said:

A 2NT response eats up a lot of bidding space so it needs to send a fairly precise message. In general, you want to have decent stoppers in every suit, which JT is not really. I would far prefer a 1♦ response, after which the bidding will continue 2♠ - 3♣; 3NT. I am not certain enough of the GIB system to know whether 4♣ or 4NT is the right bid after that but the chances are that you will end up in 6NT anyway, so while I would not have responded 2NT, in the end it cannot be said to have been a bad decision. GIB's 4♣ call though; yeah, pretty bad.

I know, in the past I never would have considered no trumps with that, but my criteria for no trump bids have changed somewhat in line with the bidding system. I still also do prefer to quickly get to the destination, especially with GiB - fewer chances of anything going wrong. There is also preemptive value. Sometimes I would prefer a mroe descriptive and slower auction but a 1 diamond bid runs the risk of interefernce

But think about my thought process (if there was one). We arent going to be in a major contract. I know we may have minor fits but would be unlucky not to have some cover in hearts assuming we progress etc And there is no indiciation to opps where the weakness lies