[calm01]

http://tinyurl.com/ctplwj6

[georgi]

Thanks for reporting.

It seems like glitch with this 4NT blackwood continuation in general after this sequence.

It will be checked for fix.

[broze]

Presumably you're talking about that glitch response to BW, but I hate those "Soloway jump shifts" too. Ideally you will want to end up in 7♣ here (although 7 ♦ at least makes on squeeze from what I can see). After the jump shift you'll never find a club contract. GIB makes some odd decisions sometimes but this hand is interesting from an academic POV.

My p and I would probably bid:

1♣ - (p) - 1♦ - (p)
2NT - (p) - 4♠¹ - (p)
5♥² - (p) - 7♣ - (Ap)

1) Void exclusion RKCB for ♣
2) 2 keycards with the Q♣

Some people would play the 4♠ call differently but we've found this the most useful.

[barmar]

South should bid 2NT over 2♦. North will then bid 3♠, which shows ♣ support and ♠ shortness. This is part of Soloway Jump Shifts: responder is never 2-suited unless the second suit is opener's, so 3♠ can't be natural, and it's used as a delayed splinter raise of opener's suit.

GIB's 6♦ response to RKC is correct, but the explanation is wrong. Jumping to 6 in trumps shows an odd number of key cards and a void in a suit above trumps (when the void is below trumps you jump to 6 of the void suit).

I just checked the bidding DB, and it has this correct. It says: "Odd number of keycards. Void above D".

Was this hand using the download client? It has an older bidding DB.

[Bbradley62]

barmar, on 2011-December-12, 12:14, said:

This is part of Soloway Jump Shifts: responder is never 2-suited unless the second suit is opener's...

This would be another good addition to the GIB System Notes, since most of us probably don't know the details of Soloway Jump Shifts.

[barmar]

OK, I'm adding a description of Soloway Jump Shifts.

[Bbradley62]

Thank you.

[calm01]

Barmar asked:

"Was this hand using the download client? It has an older bidding DB"

I employ http://www.bridgebas...ient/client.php

Concurrently using different versions in is a recipe for extra work for you and your colleagues and confusion for users seeing others comments without context. Please for all of us align the versions as a matter of priority.

If you get resistance from colleagues to an alignment of versions - begin to see the source of resistance as a real problem to progress and as a training requirement.

If it is not practical to align the versions, withdraw the older version(s) giving clear information with good notice about how to transfer to the single version.

[barmar]

You're using the web version, not the download version.

It looks like there is a bug in the bidding database. It has two entries for jumping in our suit after a strong JS -- one is for a solid suit and minimum, the other is the void-showing response to RKC. We need to specify that the first meaning only applies after natural bids, not Blackwood. Or maybe we should specify that the first meaning is only for jumps to game, not higher jumps (there's no "fast arrival" for slams).

[barmar]

We announced years ago that we're no longer making improvements to the old version of BBO, but we're not stopping people from using it. It's their choice.