Help
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.
Page 1 of 1
First round control?
#1
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 6,542
- Joined: 2010-February-01
- Gender:Male
- Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA
Posted 2015-February-07, 16:27
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.
#2
- Group: Yellows
- Posts: 1,317
- Joined: 2007-December-30
- Gender:Male
- Location:Bulgaria
Posted 2015-February-12, 07:22
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 ).
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 ).
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 4,485
- Joined: 2009-July-14
- Gender:Male
- Location:London
Posted 2015-February-12, 07:28
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?
Gordon Rainsford
London UK
London UK
#4
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,764
- Joined: 2014-January-12
- Gender:Male
- Location:Bari (ITALIA)
- Interests:I'm also on YOUTUBE with a channel of music songs .
Posted 2015-February-12, 09:30
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 ).
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 ).
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 7,612
- Joined: 2009-September-28
- Gender:Male
- Location:China
Posted 2015-February-12, 09:43
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.
Page 1 of 1