Help
If North is too strong to splinter (I'm not sure what GIB's limit is but the BBO Advanced 1.3 convention card says 9-12HCP) then either he should bid 2♦ or the description of 2N should not include "balanced".
Page 1 of 1
Jacoby 2N is "balanced"
#1
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 6,542
- Joined: 2010-February-01
- Gender:Male
- Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA
Posted 2011-August-08, 07:46
If North is too strong to splinter (I'm not sure what GIB's limit is but the BBO Advanced 1.3 convention card says 9-12HCP) then either he should bid 2♦ or the description of 2N should not include "balanced".
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 7,786
- Joined: 2004-September-05
- Gender:Male
- Location:Galloway NJ USA
-
Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.
Posted 2011-August-08, 07:52
No, North is not too strong to splinter the way I play spinter bids, but I don't think that a splinter is the appropriate call on the hand.
I would start with 2♦ followed by a minimum forcing spade raise.
The other possibility is Jacoby 2NT, which could strike gold if partner has a club singleton.
The main point is that North has to determine whether he wants to be the captain of this auction (Jacoby 2NT), the servant (splinter) or to initiate a cooperative auction (2♦). It appears to me that a cooperative auction is likely to work best, but there is no guarantee.
I would start with 2♦ followed by a minimum forcing spade raise.
The other possibility is Jacoby 2NT, which could strike gold if partner has a club singleton.
The main point is that North has to determine whether he wants to be the captain of this auction (Jacoby 2NT), the servant (splinter) or to initiate a cooperative auction (2♦). It appears to me that a cooperative auction is likely to work best, but there is no guarantee.
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 6,542
- Joined: 2010-February-01
- Gender:Male
- Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA
Posted 2011-August-08, 08:07
ArtK78, on 2011-August-08, 07:52, said:
The main point is...
I left several possibilities open, because my main point is that the hand should match the description of the bid chosen; GIB should either choose a different bid or the description should include the possibility of this hand, which is not balanced.
#4
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 7,786
- Joined: 2004-September-05
- Gender:Male
- Location:Galloway NJ USA
-
Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.
Posted 2011-August-08, 08:51
If you rely on the descripton of a bid chosen by GIB to match the hand held by GIB you will often be very disappointed.
#5
- Csaba the Hutt
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,027
- Joined: 2006-June-16
- Gender:Male
- Interests:bye
Posted 2011-August-08, 09:27
The point of these threads is to make these instances of disappointment less and less frequent.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
#6
- Group: Admin
- Posts: 22,027
- Joined: 2004-August-21
- Gender:Male
Posted 2011-August-08, 23:44
The problem is that GIB has both "book" bids and "simulation" bids. The explanations describe the book bids.
Also, note that there's not much room in the explanations. Perhaps the correct explanation of Jacoby 2NT is "balanced, 4+S, 13+ total points; or 4+S, 16+ total points", but I don't think this will fit. This is a general problem with bids that can be used with multiple hand types.
Also, note that there's not much room in the explanations. Perhaps the correct explanation of Jacoby 2NT is "balanced, 4+S, 13+ total points; or 4+S, 16+ total points", but I don't think this will fit. This is a general problem with bids that can be used with multiple hand types.
#7
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 6,542
- Joined: 2010-February-01
- Gender:Male
- Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA
Posted 2011-August-09, 05:23
Wouldn't either "4+S; 13+ total points; balanced if minimum" or simply "4+S; 13+ total points" be accurate, even if the latter is a little more vague than one might like? There are many descriptions that are more vague than we might like, for the sake of having them not be inaccurate.
Page 1 of 1