[1eyedjack]

---

MP, best hand South

I accept that my 4C bid may have been a bit naïve. That said, there was plenty of room for slam to be good on the 3H raise. Furthermore, the 4C confirms that there is at least one Spade cashing off the top. Any human North would rebid 4D if sufficiently excited by the turn of events not to just sign out in 4H. But having bid 4D he would respect a 4H signout by South. But as a last resort, If moving over 4H, he would stop in a safe 5H.

[georgi]

You're right that 4♣ denies ♠A, but 4♦ should show in theory at least K+ in spades.

As otherwise if both hands don't have spades why we cuebid further.

Also 4♣ shows 21-22 TP, hand almost for 2♣ opening.

So a hand that North imagines is something like:

♠KQx
♥AJxxx
♦K
♣AKxx

So practically missing ♠A is the only one defensive trick.

[1eyedjack]

georgi, on 2014-April-20, 14:18, said:

You're right that 4♣ denies ♠A, but 4♦ should show in theory at least K+ in spades.

As otherwise if both hands don't have spades why we cuebid further.

What you seem to be saying is that North requires K+ in Spades to justify a Diamond cue below game, but it is perfectly OK for it to bid Blackwood and commit to the 5 level with Spades wide open?

South has denied first round Spade control by cue bidding 4C. But South has not denied second round Spade control, which might be singleton or King. Indeed in your own example hand below, North assumes that South does have 2nd round Spade control. That being the case, why would North require K+ to cue 4D, which does not even commit beyond 4H?

And note that if it South has King it is protected on opening lead as South declares Hearts.

georgi, on 2014-April-20, 14:18, said:

Also 4♣ shows 21-22 TP, hand almost for 2♣ opening.

Perhaps you suggest that I should give up on slam with South hand, as I do not have 21-22 TP


You may be right. I disagree, but I may be wrong. I have yet to be persuaded. I could have been stronger, and still short of 21 TP. Would that still have been not worth a 4C cue?

Can we agree that 4C is the only sensible slam try that South can make if minded to make a slam try, unless so powerful that he can drive to the 5 level on his own? Indeed with 21-22 TP South probably could do so.

georgi, on 2014-April-20, 14:18, said:

So a hand that North imagines is something like:

♠KQx
♥AJxxx
♦K
♣AKxx

So practically missing ♠A is the only one defensive trick.

With a hand like this South can bid Blackwood direct over 3H.

Or if he chose to bid 4C, he would certainly be able to bid Blackwood over a 4D cue from partner.

Sorry, Georgi, North's 4N bid over 4C is just bad, bad, bad.

Blackwood comes with some cardinal rules:

You don't bid it with a void, and you don't bid it with 2 top losers in a side suit unless you have good reason to believe that partner has a control in the suit.

Sometimes you have to break these cardinal rules, generally because there is no better alternative. But when you have an easy 4D cue available that pressure does not apply.

[steve2005]

Cue-bidding Aces is a flaw in my opinion. cuebidding Aces and Kings (and sometimes shortness) and if you have a control in all side suits then you use keycard to find out if off 2 KC (or 1KC &Q) is better.

A human would at least cuebid 4♦ with the K♦ then the person with the K♠ or singleton can Keycard but GiB cant cue-bid K♦ cause it's not an Ace

[1eyedjack]

steve2005, on 2014-April-20, 19:32, said:

Cue-bidding Aces is a flaw in my opinion. cuebidding Aces and Kings (and sometimes shortness) and if you have a control in all side suits then you use keycard to find out if off 2 KC (or 1KC &Q) is better.

I agree, with a human I would cue bid the King of Spades at 3S if I had it. Possibly. But I work within the confines of GIBberish wherein I know that cues show Aces except when already denied. We can debate the merits of Italian style cues, but I can't see that happening without a concerted campaign with demonstrable majority support, and that probably justifies a thread or threads of its own. May already have been debated at length in this forum.

I am actually quite taken with Robson's approach; that the first slam try should be a shape description only after which do you show controls. That would argue for South to bid 4D over 3H. However, again whatever its theoretical merits are otiose if GIB doesn't play it.

Can anyone say what would 3NT have meant by South over 3H, by the way? Serious? Non-serious? Contract suggestion? If 3NT is a non-serious slam try in H it could explain why North expects South to have 21 TP for the 4C bid. Not that this is a good example hand to advertise the methods, South having the Club control which he knows that North cannot cue over 3N. But it might shed light on the matter.

steve2005, on 2014-April-20, 19:32, said:

A human would at least cuebid 4♦ with the K♦ then the person with the K♠ or singleton can Keycard but GiB cant cue-bid K♦ cause it's not an Ace

You have misread the hand. No-one is suggesting cue bidding a Diamond King. North, who is responding to the 4C clue, has the Ace of Diamonds. So human or GIB could cue bid Diamonds over 4C if so minded. And SHOULD be so minded.One day, GIB might even be persuaded to play Last Train, in which case the 4D "cue" might not promise even the King of Diamonds, let alone Ace. But that is a pipe dream for the future, and a long time down the road at that.

[georgi]

I am not saying 4♣ meaning of 21-22 is expected from all players as with quite less, but distributional hand slam would be cold.

I am just explaining why GIB did this and what its expected.

Cuebidding is as it seems not so polished in GIB's brain, but the goal is to be better for sure.

Some major difference is as it seems the evaluation of hand which GIB would have more problems to see through. Human, of course, could easier "sniff" slam for which GIB needs algorithm.

Nowadays GIB needs mostly Aces to cuebid, sometimes it might do it with King if holds a void ( which in theory cannot show ).

To be replaced this with Kings+ or singletons/voids it needs more work to be described. There is no doubt GIB needs improvement. And it comes with every version. Unfortunately not so comprehensive as expected.

[1eyedjack]

OK, but can we at least agree on how we would prefer the auction to go, within GIB system? Only with agreement on that, on this and similar hands, can there be any hope of long term improvement. Acceptance that 4D is a better bid than 4N would be a good starting point.I get that this is not something that is going to be "fixed" in the next release.

[georgi]

4♦ is better as responder is not in the right to decide final contract after opener initiated slam try and responder is rather limited ( especially in this very case with 10-12TP ), so better to just describe himself.

On the other hand, but that's only my personal call i would bid 2NT instead of 3H, showing GF HCP values.

Over expected club or none singleton 4H would deny spade control so partner would be in control again to decide whether to proceed or not. Over 3♠ rebid by opener showing singleton spade there would be early Christmas / Easter

Here GIB would do same, but it has 12TP because of ♦A in doubleton. If the Ace was in spades or clubs 2NT would follow as needed 13+TP.