[Antrax]

I was playing in the app, so there's no handviewer link, but it was all vul, GIB N opens 1♠ in second seat and GIB E bids 2NT over that. Now my jump to 4♠ doesn't show 5+ spades and a weak hand, but rather 3+ spades and 13-18 TP. Why is the logic there different than in the auction (p)-1♠-(2♥)-4♠?

[the hog]

The reason it is different is that you have the cues of 3C and 3D available to show different hand types. As partner opened S I would bid 3D to show a raise to 3S+. A normal 3S bid is weaker and 4S still shows long S, weakish, as before.

[Antrax]

I suggest you read the OP again.

[Bbradley62]

 the hog, on 2012-August-06, 01:39, said:

As partner opened S I would bid 3D to show a raise to 3S+.

When you play with GIB, you must play GIB's system, which is apparently different than your preferred methods.

 georgi, on 2011-December-12, 00:48, said:

For GIB when there are two suits shown ( clearly ) it could use these two suits by showing support in partner's suit and unbidded 4th suit.

This includes

1♣ - 2♣ (majors) - ?
=> 2♥ - Limit raise or better in ♣ -- 4+ ♣; 10-12 total points
=> 2♠ - Constructive, 4th suit -- 5+ ♦; 10+ total points
Similar for 1♦ - 2♦

1♥ - 2NT ( minors ) - ?
=> 3♣ - Limit raise or better in ♥ -- 4+ ♥; 10-12 total points
=> 3♦ - Constructive, 4th suit -- 5+ ♠; 10+ total points
Similar for 1♠ - 2NT

1♣ - 2NT ( ♦ + ♥ ) - ?
=> 3♦ - Limit raise or better in C -- 4+ ♣; 10-12 total points
=> 3♥ - Constructive, 4th suit -- 5+ ♠; 10+ total points
Similar for 1♦ - 2NT ( ♣ + ♥ )

<<joined from Georgi's next post>>

1♠ - 2NT - 3♣/3♦ is identical with 1♥ - 2NT, just 3♣ will show fit in spades and 3♦ will show constructive hearts.

1♠ - 2NT - 3♥ - Natural, not forcing -- 2- ♠; twice rebiddable ♥; 7-9 total points

[the hog]

I did read your post again and it means the same as it meant to me last time. You asked why the logic is different and I explained. So you were playing with GIB, so what? Does this mean YOU have to bid incorrectly?

[Bbradley62]

 the hog, on 2012-August-06, 05:01, said:

So you were playing with GIB, so what? Does this mean YOU have to bid incorrectly?

So, the definition of "bidding correctly" is "bidding the way the hog prefers"? You're even more of a pompous ass than I thought you were. [Yes, censors, go ahead and remove that last sentence.]

Most players would agree that "bidding correctly" means "bidding in accordance with partnership methods". When you play with GIB, you have agreed to play his methods. As Georgi has explained in the other thread, these methods include bidding 3♣, not 3♦, over 1♠-(2NT) to show good spade support. It would be freakin' stupid to insist on bidding 3♦ to show that hand when you have agreed to do otherwise.

[Zelandakh]

The OP's point is that after the auction 1♠ - (2♥), you can bid 3♥ to show a good spade raise and 4♠ is weaker and more distributional. After the auction 1♠ - (2NT), 3♣ still shows a good spade raise but now 4♠ is not weaker and more distributional (only 3+ spades, etc). The question as to which cue bid is used as the good raise is irrelevant here.

[Antrax]

Thank you, Zelandakh. I admit I thought my OP was quite understandable. Clearly it wasn't.

[the hog]

 Bbradley62, on 2012-August-06, 05:47, said:

So, the definition of "bidding correctly" is "bidding the way the hog prefers"? You're even more of a pompous ass than I thought you were. [Yes, censors, go ahead and remove that last sentence.]

Most players would agree that "bidding correctly" means "bidding in accordance with partnership methods". When you play with GIB, you have agreed to play his methods. As Georgi has explained in the other thread, these methods include bidding 3♣, not 3♦, over 1♠-(2NT) to show good spade support. It would be freakin' stupid to insist on bidding 3♦ to show that hand when you have agreed to do otherwise.

BBradley, I don't play with myself like you clearly do. Most good players tie Ds to S and C to hearts. I guess you do not fall into that category. Apply the interpretation of my statement as you wish.

[Bbradley62]

Actually, Georgi's post from December (above) was in response to a question from me about GIB's handling of this, because I had never seen GIB's approach before. As for how "good players" bid, I'd be willing to bet that players of the caliber of Justin Lall (who plays with GIB frequently) choose to make bids that their GIB partners understand, rather than stubbornly insisting that their way is the only way.

[Zelandakh]

There are many ways to play Unusual over Unusual in the auction 1M - (2NT). One way is to tie clubs to hearts and diamonds to spades, as suggested by the hog. Another very popular method in expert circles is for the higher cue to be the good raise and the lower cue to show the 4th suit. The reason for this is that they feel that the extra space is more useful when no fit has been found. GIB's method, where the lower cue is the good raise, is by far the least common by my reckoning. It seems like this ought to be a bad idea.

However, this still has nothing whatsoever to do with the point raised in the OP!

PS: I would like to suggest the first sentence of Post #9 be removed - I think it is offensive and against the ToS on at least 2 counts.

[Bbradley62]

 Zelandakh, on 2012-August-07, 03:23, said:

PS: I would like to suggest the first sentence of Post #9 be removed - I think it is offensive and against the ToS on at least 2 counts.

Actually, I think that sentence very nicely demonstrates The Hog's attitude about playing with GIB, which is why I find it puzzling that he insists on posting in the GIB forum.