[chasetb]

On hand 1, I was bidding this way planning to stop in 4♠, but decided later that partner had 5-6 Hearts. Anyways, my 2♠ showed 16+ points and 4- ♠, but biddable ones?

---

Hand 2 (Entered an Indy midway, so created it). GIB is North. On a side note, how to I modify it to enter names?

---

I don't think it's standard, but over 2NT I pitch to you all that 3♣ should be Baron and 3NT to be 5+ ♣, and both to be forcing to 4NT.

---

Over 1♣ - 3♦/3♥/3♠ or 1♦ - 3♥/3♠, 3NT should promise at least one stopper, and be more limited in points. I would say limited to 16- HCP and 18- points, but I am open to suggestions here.

[Bbradley62]

chasetb, on 2014-August-19, 12:32, said:

Anyways, my 2♠ showed 16+ points and 4- ♠, but biddable ones?

GIB's definition of "biddable" is: "5+ cards, or 4 cards + 3 of 5 honors or more than 4 8421 points", so the explanation of your 2♠ bid is simply saying that you wouldn't bother to show 4 crappy ones. That's bad? Edit... Oh, upon looking at it again, you are saying that 2♠ should be a double and correct, showing real spades... I agree with that.

chasetb, on 2014-August-19, 12:32, said:

Hand 2 (Entered an Indy midway, so created it). GIB is North. On a side note, how to I modify it to enter names?

---

Each early command (names, hand definitions, etc) starts with "&". "&en=xyz" means "East's name is xyz". So, I've added "&nn=Robot" to the diagram.

This post has been edited by Bbradley62: 2014-August-19, 13:01

[1eyedjack]

Bbradley62, on 2014-August-19, 12:50, said:

GIB's definition of "biddable" is: "5+ cards, or 4 cards + 3 of 5 honors or more than 4 8421 points", so the explanation of your 2♠ bid is simply saying that you wouldn't bother to show 4 crappy ones. That's bad?

It is accurate, but incomplete. You also would not do it on 5 crappy ones. Or 6 crappy ones. Or 4 good ones,

[chasetb]

Bbradley62, on 2014-August-19, 12:50, said:

GIB's definition of "biddable" is: "5+ cards, or 4 cards + 3 of 5 honors or more than 4 8421 points", so the explanation of your 2♠ bid is simply saying that you wouldn't bother to show 4 crappy ones. That's bad?

I'm not arguing with the definition of 'biddable', but when the first description is 4- ♠, as in 4 or less Spades, and then it says 'biddable spades' then there's a conflict, unless GIB can only have a very strong 4-card suit.

Bbradley62, on 2014-August-19, 12:50, said:

---

Each early command (names, hand definitions, etc) starts with "&". "&en=xyz" means "East's name is xyz". So, I've added "&nn=Robot" to the diagram.

---

Got it, and as you can see I did it. Thanks for the help there!

[1eyedjack]

chasetb, on 2014-August-19, 13:05, said:

I'm not arguing with the definition of 'biddable', but when the first description is 4- ♠, as in 4 or less Spades, and then it says 'biddable spades' then there's a conflict, unless GIB can only have a very strong 4-card suit.

I don't think that it is just that conflict at issue. A 4 card spade suit comprising AKQJ is, in my view, unsuitable for introducing as a new suit having made a takeout double of another suit on the previous round.