[uva72uva72]

♠8♥QJ54♦65♣1065432
♠A82♥643♦A♣AJ10952
♠7♥1065♦K104♣AJ7653

With each of these 3 hands, North bid 2NT in response to South's 1NT opening, the only distinction being that North originally passed with the 3rd hand.

This method works very well with hands 1 and 2, since North is in the best position to know whether to pass or bid on respectively. The third hand, though, has the potential to yield an excellent play for 3NT if partner holds the right hand. In the actual case, 3NT made with an overtrick when it was bid. Yet with this hand North will always pass South's 3♣ rebid, and South has no mechanism available to indicate a fit and suggest 3NT if North holds hand 3. So, except in the cases where North holds the big hand (where the bidding is going to continue no matter what), South has to make a unilateral decision with the likely results being a big plus or a big minus (I haven't seen North pull 3NT to 4♣ with the weak hand).

Has any thought been given to changing the way that the robot bids hand 3? If there's no sentiment for adding a method of describing an invitational hand with a long minor, would it be possible to have North use the invitational 2♣ followed by 2NT sequence with these hands so that South can rebid 3♣ over 2NT knowing that a game won't be missed? With 8 HCP and a long minor, 2NT is not likely to be a catastrophe, but 3NT with hand 1 is very likely to be.

Or am I missing something?

[iandayre]

You are certainly correct that Hand 3 should be bid differently. Two under transfers are good for the one suited hands but create problems for the hands that would have bid MSS. Perhaps the best solution for GIB would be to go through Stayman and invite with 2NT.

But I don't understand your comment about South bidding 3C over 2NT knowing a game won't be missed. What sort of hand would you propose that the 1NT opener do this with? Most hands will be the simple balanced hand invites, not a long C suit.

[uva72uva72]

I was trying to say that if the invitational hand is eliminated from consideration, South can accept the 2NT transfer to 3♣ and know that if North now passes it holds the weak (first example) hand and it's very unlikely that a game will have been be missed.

[iandayre]

Yes I see your point now, and I agree. Playing one-under minor transfers, one should be able to simple accept the vast majority of the time.

[1eyedjack]

Playing one-under transfers to the minors, I think that there is a case for insisting that responder initially pass 1N with zero game interest (and a long minor). But that would not be standard, I think, nor GIB system.

[steve2005]

uva72uva72, on 2014-December-25, 12:03, said:

♠7♥1065♦K104♣AJ7653

With third hand reasonable to take a shot at 3N. Even if playing some sort of invite and opener goes on Kx♣ you still have finesse

If feeling conservative pass 1N especially at MP, 1N will score better than 3♣ usually