[m1cha]

I see an increasing number of cases where robots bid more cards than they actually have. Here's one example from the Free Dayly (IMPs) yesterday.

{comments}

---

(Sorry for a bad picture, I haven't found out yet how to do it better.)

Robot here fakes a ♠ card by raising me to 2♠, so I end up in 5♠ in a Moysian and go down. I know I guessed and played badly, I was in a hurry. But the thing is, if I played in ♥ I'd just make an additional trick. 5♠ is always down on a ♣ lead but 5♥ can make. 6♥ makes after any other lead, 6NT as well. 6♦ always makes and is easy to play! But I cannot find the diamond fit when the robot fakes a ♠ fit instead of just bidding its second suit. A 2♦ rebid seems pretty normal to me. (3♣ after that should be 4th suit, of course.)

[wank]

as far as a large part, and probably most, of the world is concerned, 2S is the right bid on the north hand and it's the definition which is wrong.

[m1cha]

wank, on 2016-November-21, 17:14, said:

as far as a large part, and probably most, of the world is concerned, 2S is the right bid on the north hand and it's the definition which is wrong.

Not my world .
Anyway, so I guess I have to bid my 4-card minor if I want to hear the quality of our spades fit, 3♦. Which is probably GF because it's above 2NT. So opener would
- bid 4♠ with 4 ♠ cards, otherwise
- bid 3NT with a stop in the other minor, or
- bid 3♠ with 3 ♠ cards without a stop, but
- never raise my minor because 4♦ is above 3NT which may be our best spot.
Is that more or less correct?

And the rationale behind it is that, with weak hands, playing 2♠ in a 4-3 fit is not much worse than playing 2♥ in a 5-2 fit but you got some chance of playing 2♠ in a 5-3 fit and that's how you profit?
[Edit: Ok, I do see a profit from showing your strength immediately.]