[thepossum]

---

Nice hand opposite anything but what do you reckon

[pilowsky]

3♦ or pass. Never trust a robot.

[mcphee]

I am most certainly reaching game and this sort of looks like a place to blow off a S lead so I bid 2S and bounce to 5D. If we can avoid a S lead 5D should have a shot. Could easily be a 4 or 6 hand.

[thepossum]

pilowsky, on 2023-January-15, 00:18, said:

3♦ or pass. Never trust a robot.

Thx. Have added pass to my poll. Forgot that option 😊

[thepossum]

mcphee, on 2023-January-15, 03:40, said:

I am most certainly reaching game and this sort of looks like a place to blow off a S lead so I bid 2S and bounce to 5D. If we can avoid a S lead 5D should have a shot. Could easily be a 4 or 6 hand.

Indeed it could

[pescetom]

Assuming that the negative reply to 2NT is 3D (not pass as one might deduce) this looks the way to go, particularly if there is a way to control-bid or Kickback after a positive reply.

[LBengtsson]

thepossum, on 2023-January-14, 23:56, said:

---

Nice hand opposite anything but what do you reckon

It would be good to have a relay system here to find out what sort of hand partner has in terms of suit quality and shape, but as that is not available, I would just bid 5♦ which looks a decent contract that might be made depending on which suit is led. I smiled ( ) at mcphee's suggestion of bidding 2♠ to discourage a lead - clever - but if partner is the sort of player who opens 2♦ with 6m4M you could end in a fix if the 4M is ♠.

It could be a 4♦, 5♦ or 6♦ hand (as mcphee says) but I would like to be in game here at the very least. Anything less looks like the Lion from the Wizard of Oz - very cowardly

[pescetom]

LBengtsson, on 2023-January-15, 14:44, said:

I smiled ( ) at mcphee's suggestion of bidding 2♠ to discourage a lead - clever - but if partner is the sort of player who opens 2♦ with 6m4M you could end in a fix if the 4M is ♠.

I squirmed, I have never been comfortable with the idea that I or my opponents could psyche opposite a robot that is incapable of remembering my behaviour and modifying the disclosed agreement. Certainly an issue for future bridge laws (and more clarity in current BBO tournament regulations).

[thepossum]

This is the sad story

3D+3 for a remarkable 38%

A few managed to find 5D+1 and a few others managed to make 3NT+3 despite it not being there double dummy

I understand there are no additional features (singleton?) and there are a fair number of losers - but a minimum - how to find the contract

I seriously considered 4NT but you may as well just bid 6 - no with 0 or 1 you can end in 5 ??

GiB and I have a different understanding of strong and weak, and pre-emptive style

I certainly felt embarrassed though (at my own bidding and lack of courage my convictions)

---

[pescetom]

It's interesting that the description of the 'weak' opening does not set a max on total points.
Although I've seen it open worse, and many humans would do the same.
But you do deserve your money back, for the 3♦ "Minimum" (!) reply when holding the defined maximum

[thepossum]

pescetom, on 2023-January-16, 09:46, said:

It's interesting that the description of the 'weak' opening does not set a max on total points.
Although I've seen it open worse, and many humans would do the same.
But you do deserve your money back, for the 3♦ "Minimum" (!) reply when holding the defined maximum

Sadly the hand had no features to show - because I had most of them

I blame myself entirely for not just bidding 5D

And I am by now familiar with GiB's very strong preempts - I put it through Q-plus Demo which rated it a trick higher and bid 3D - for me I think it would be 1D

[smerriman]

pescetom, on 2023-January-16, 09:46, said:

But you do deserve your money back, for the 3♦ "Minimum" (!) reply when holding the defined maximum

'Minimum' is just a silly description here. 2N is a feature ask rather than strength ask, so it bids a new suit with a feature, 3N with AKQ of diamonds, and 3♦ with everything else. Why they described it as 'minimum', I have no idea. Why they chose AKQ as the 3N bid, no idea either.