[Bbradley62]

---

Another example of GIB needing to keep quiet when partner jumps to game or slam. The "4- S" description of 6♠ is absurd.

[Antrax]

I wonder what a 6♠ overcall is, as opposed to X-then-overcall.

[Bbradley62]

---

[Antrax]

Ah, so this is probably just GIB's general problem with "big double" type bids.

[Bbradley62]

Yup. He also didn't interfere with Michaels then jump to 6.

[Bbradley62]

Although GIB should also not tell me that he has 7-8 points when he has 0

[Antrax]

Yeah, but you know simulations told it (accurately, I think) that with a yarb, a 4-3 fit at best won't play better than a known 5-3 (at least) fit.

[RunemPard]

Antrax, on 2012-September-24, 02:49, said:

Yeah, but you know simulations told it (accurately, I think) that with a yarb, a 4-3 fit at best won't play better than a known 5-3 (at least) fit.

This is 100% true. I personally am ecstatic that you understand this logic. The 4-3-3-3 zero is the perfect hand to raise partner to grand with. Partner has shown that he was interested in playing a possible grand by doubling then signing off in 6 of a suit. Our 3 card support is simply worthless at this point. Why give the opponents the chance to sacrifice the slam when we can do it ourselves? By bidding this way, we are effectively removing any chance of the opponents trying to play 7 in one of their suits!

It truly is genius, and a pure delight to have seen in action.

[Antrax]

GIB isn't "raising", if it could it would bid 8♦, I believe.

[Quantumcat]

RunemPard, on 2012-September-24, 05:33, said:

It truly is genius, and a pure delight to have seen in action.

Not sure if you understood what Antrax said. Maybe I didn't either, but my interpretation was that takeout doubler still had a takeout double later on, and because he bid spades rather than a lower suit, he must be OK to be in grand in any suit lower than spades, and probably wouldn't mind getting raised if responder had spades either. The guaranteed '5-3' fit he mentioned is diamonds, the '4-3' fit spades.

[Antrax]

That's giving GIB a bit too much credit. Once you make a TO double, your shape turns into 2- doubled suit, 3+ other suits. This is not revised if the doubler later bids his suit (the "big double").
In addition, there seems to be a rule saying if you didn't overcall spades, you can't have 5 or more of them. So simulations have S with at most 4 spades and at least 3 diamonds. Not sure what the result was, but it seems you're making more or going down less opposite this presumed shape if you play in diamonds (even given it's one level higher). So, GIB corrected spades to diamonds. That's all guesswork, but the bid explanations and other auctions that start with double-and-bid-a-suit seem to be consistent with this.

[RunemPard]

Quantumcat, on 2012-September-24, 21:42, said:

Not sure if you understood what Antrax said. Maybe I didn't either, but my interpretation was that takeout doubler still had a takeout double later on, and because he bid spades rather than a lower suit, he must be OK to be in grand in any suit lower than spades, and probably wouldn't mind getting raised if responder had spades either. The guaranteed '5-3' fit he mentioned is diamonds, the '4-3' fit spades.

Just a sarcastic post by me. I didn't expect to get serious replies.

[Antrax]

Normally above a certain age, sarcasm is no longer sufficient on its own merit. So, I thought you really hadn't understood the principle here.