[Bbradley62]

---

I don't really have a strong opinion as to whether GIB's system should be that 3♣ should show first-round control or first-or-second round control. However, I do have a strong opinion that the explanation provided for the bid should accurately explain GIB's system.

[georgi]

When there are values close to slam or GF+, like here, GIB could make fake-ace-cuebid. It only happens when there is aside void.

And this suit where GIB cuebids is never the void, its headed with King+.

And the explanation cannot reveal which of these both cases is ( real Ace or K+ and aside void ).

[gordontd]

georgi, on 2015-February-12, 07:22, said:

And the explanation cannot reveal which of these both cases is ( real Ace or K+ and aside void ).

Why not? Why can't it say CA, or CK plus void?

[Lovera]

georgi, on 2015-February-12, 07:22, said:

When there are values close to slam or GF+, like here, GIB could make fake-ace-cuebid. It only happens when there is aside void.

And this suit where GIB cuebids is never the void, its headed with King+.

And the explanation cannot reveal which of these both cases is ( real Ace or K+ and aside void ).

I don't think is it impossible to know. For instance we have 0 or 3 keys that allows to esclude any case from NT bidder to read for Aces. Secondary, if you apply my method that reveales void ..5 ♦=? Queen, 5 NT= yes (heart) Queen plus an indeterminate void ... ( see RKCB 3014 in "Find my content" in Lovera's profile ).

[lycier]

Bbradley62, on 2015-February-07, 16:27, said:

I don't really have a strong opinion as to whether GIB's system should be that 3♣ should show first-round control or first-or-second round control. However, I do have a strong opinion that the explanation provided for the bid should accurately explain GIB's system.

That is a good idea for what you said,a pity that it is also a complicated work,I guess it will be resolved in 64 version at least (now is 32 version) in the future.