[uva72uva72]

My link

IMPS, ACBL robot individual

Has there been an unannounced change in the robot's methods for bidding big balanced hands? Else why did it pass out 3♥ on an auction in which South showed 22-24? Note that those who opened 2NT (presumably showing 20-21) were put in game. Think North was intimidated by the double of 2♣? A few Souths super-accepted the transfer to ♥s; in those instances, North invoked Blackwood and reached an unmakeable 5♥. North simply will not allow you to get a normal result on this hand if you make the normal opening bid.

North's actions presented a gift of more than 8 IMPS to 3 participants who consciously underbid their hands as against the 10 participants who opened 2♣ and scored 170 in 3♥.

[iandayre]

The problem appears to be with the description of 2NT as apparently "balanced minimum - any shape", although we can't see the whole thing. This is misleading and clearly incorrect. Certainly you are right that passing 3H can't possibly make sense.

Wouldn't 2NT have been a 3433 superaccept without the double? Should be the same with it. Not sure what you intended 2NT to be.

[uva72uva72]

I'm not sure I understand the question. North's 2♦ is explained as "waiting, forcing to 2NT" which I assume is the case with our without the double; so my 2NT was simply intended to show 22-24 balanced, as it would have been without the double.

[Bbradley62]

iandayre, on 2015-April-09, 13:58, said:

Wouldn't 2NT have been a 3433 superaccept without the double? Should be the same with it. Not sure what you intended 2NT to be.

Super-accept of what? 2♦ is not a transfer. The super-accept OP refers to is at the tables where South chose to open 2N (20-21 balanced) with 22HCP. 2N at OP's table shows 22-24 balanced (minimum for the 2♣ opening).

[Bbradley62]

I'm guessing there's a hole in GIB's bidding logic over 3♥ because he doesn't want to:

• bid 4H with only three hearts, or
  
• bid 3N without a club stopper, or
  
• bid 4D with this weak a hand.