[smerriman]

---

According to Gib, I have shown a strong 5440 hand. Gib decides now is a good time to ignore the 10 card diamond fit and show a 'biddable' club suit at the 5 level instead.

Either that, or 5♣ was meant to be a cue, and the description was wrong.

[The_Badger]

Hi smerriman,

When GIB describes a bid, I'm sure various interpretations of that bid cannot be described accurately. Ask yourself whether North can have a hand with 8 solid or semi-solid clubs for his 1NT, 3NT, then 5♣ bid?

I give GIB its due as 5♣ is an advanced cue-bid, agreeing diamonds surely? Whether GIB understands cue bids is another matter!

I think it is virtually impossible to gauge the distributional strength of North's hand to bid 6♦ with a Robot. A human partner, hopefully, would interpret 5♣ as "you've hit the jackpot partner, and I have extras."

[iandayre]

One must admit, the hand fits all the listed criteria for the 5C bid. And, shows the clubs only as "biddable", by no means indicating they are playable opposite a void or even a singleton.

The question is, what would 5D have meant?

[smerriman]

The_Badger, on 2016-August-22, 01:46, said:

I give GIB its due as 5♣ is an advanced cue-bid, agreeing diamonds surely?

For what it's worth - I really had no idea what Gib was showing here, and all bids I could make seemed to show the same hand description. In the end I decided to go with 5NT - which Gib promptly passed.

[smerriman]

Here is another surprisingly similar hand that just popped up. Gib's 'biddable suit' doesn't seem to show any kind of fit.

---

[iandayre]

smerriman, on 2016-August-22, 22:39, said:

Here is another surprisingly similar hand that just popped up. Gib's 'biddable suit' doesn't seem to show any kind of fit.

---

But in this case it denies a real S fit. In the other example, it appeared to neither promise or deny a D fit.