[1eyedjack]

---

MP, best hand South, instant, pro GIB 30.

You can't see it from this posting, but trust me, there is no bid for South's hand over 3D.

3H and 4H shows Heart support but expressly denies 4 Diamond support (4H being min)3S, 3N, 4C and 4D all show precisely 2 Hearts (variously showing or denying Diamond support).

No longer is there a bid to describe a double fit, or even consistent with one. Unless there is a mismatch between the explanations and the actual meanings interpreted by GIB, which is entirely plausible.

[Bbradley62]

Another instance where the wordy description is a waste of space... For 3♥, no need to say both "no 4th D" and "2-3♦", nor "Support 3rd H" and "3-5♥" or whatever got cut off.

[iandayre]

You are quite correct. I have posted on the same subject in the past.

That said, there is no bid in most methods to show a double fit in this auction. Raising the major neither confirms nor denies a minor suit fit, while bidding an unbid suit agrees the minor but shows 2 in the major. 3NT of course shows no interest in either of responder's suits.

This is the only situation in bridge where I personally thought of a bid for a particular situation and used it in competition. I play that raising the minor to the 4 level shows the double fit. Does anyone have another way to do it?

[1eyedjack]

iandayre, on 2014-September-24, 18:39, said:

Raising the major neither confirms nor denies a minor suit fit

Were that the case with GIB it would be less of a hole: There would be a systemic bid for every hand type; just not an ideal bid. But in GIB currently, at least per explanations, raising the major does explicitly deny a minor fit. So there literally is no bid available for a hand with a double fit.

I think raising the minor is standard for the double fit. With just the minor fit you would strive to leave 3N in the frame. Not always possible, of course, depending on the auction, but nice to have simple agreements that at least provide for some cases.

[iandayre]

1eyedjack, on 2014-September-24, 20:18, said:

Were that the case with GIB it would be less of a hole: There would be a systemic bid for every hand type; just not an ideal bid. But in GIB currently, at least per explanations, raising the major does explicitly deny a minor fit. So there literally is no bid available for a hand with a double fit.

I think raising the minor is standard for the double fit. With just the minor fit you would strive to leave 3N in the frame. Not always possible, of course, depending on the auction, but nice to have simple agreements that at least provide for some cases.

I already agreed that you were correct about GIB's methods. I said that in "most methods" the return to the major neither confirms or denies a minor fit.

So you think raising the minor is the standard way to show a double fit? Can you provide a reference? I am not disagreeing and that is the best thing I can think of, but I have never seen it written anywhere nor has any partner of mine ever suggested playing that way.

[1eyedjack]

No I have never seen it in print, nor bothered (nor had cause to bother) to look it up. It is just a local custom. I do recall attending a youth bridge promotional event in Salford hosted by Irving Rose and Gus Calderwood about 30 years ago at which this was mooted,