[thepossum]

I actually considered and regretted not using Gerber here. A few took the plunge on 7NT or 7S

How do you bid it safey and securely

Very sad to miss the obvious 7NT top

After thetransfer 4NT was quantitative not Blackwood - I wanted Blackwood

I sat there and thought Gerber or transfer followed by Blackwood - but it wasn't available. Why?

If I wanted a 4NT quant I would do it immediately and not waste time with a transfer

I should have bid 7 something but was not confident along with many others that it was secure

Some may say this belongs in the robot forum but please look broader than that. Some poor souls were stuck in 4NT

For me Gerber or Blackwood would get me to 7NT on a punt

---

[harikannan]

A forcing bid like 3d (small lie) to see if partner shows a 3rd spade and later 4nt will be blackwood i guess.

[pescetom]

Gerber is not terrible here: it obtains the same information as would RKCB Blackwood after a transfer, given your top honours.

I don't dislike your choice of transfer and then quantitative 5NT, but it shouldn't be as wide ranging as the Gib system defines it here. Gib was over cautious to bid 6S, but unless you see an ethical problem in exploiting its explanation you could always correct to 7NT (which wouldn't be a huge risk as a simple response in the first place).

[thepossum]

I regret not choosing Gerber
Then again I aso regret not just bidding 7NT and not caring

But after my partner turned down my 5NT invite and I had all the top spades was it therefore safe to go to 7

Given it was matchpoints even bidding 6NT would have been better

I didn't find the 3D force. It was a hand where I was desperately looking for the force

[pescetom]

thepossum, on 2024-July-20, 06:13, said:

But after my partner turned down my 5NT invite and I had all the top spades was it therefore safe to go to 7

Yes, given that partner (illegally) explained that his reason for declining the invite was merely concern about spades honours. You know you have at least 35 HCP on the line and a spades fit.

[pescetom]

BTW there was good reason to post this in the robot discussion forum. Not only is the range of 5NT debatable, but the system explains 5NT as a quantitative invite to 7NT whereas the Gib System Notes explain it as choice of game 6S/6NT.

[hrothgar]

To start with, it feels like jumping from 2!S to 5N might hinder your ability to exchange critical information about the hand.
In particular, this hand is going to play a whole lot worse oppose two small spades than it will if you have a spade fit.

Playing in most of my partnerships, the 1NT opener would have rebid 3!D over 2!H.
The would be a super accept in spades, showing 4 card support and a doubleton Diamond

After which, responder would bid 3!H to retransfer to Spades

A bunch of cue bidding would following, but you should be well positioned to find the grand.

[Cyberyeti]

Using our (weak NT, but adjusting for strength) methods we would probably get there easily after a 1N-2♥-3♣ start.

[pescetom]

I suspect my only real chance of making a dent in bridge history is in being the first (?) to put Responder's 5-3 majors through Stayman rather Transfer, which cleans up a wealth of hands more complex than this one, where Opener will fit spades even before 5-3 is exposed.
Now the control-bid sequence cannot fail to reach 7NT.

But all this is window dressing for N/B, the important thing is that they realise at first sight they are more likely to make 7NT than 6NT and that anything less is crazy.

[thepossum]

Thanks forthe comments. I thought it was actually interesting enough for NB and not just the robot forum, and will regret for hours not just bidding 7NT
Remarkably 6NT+1 made something like 60%
I was trying to find a force, a pick a slam type bid or anything

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I think your choosen seq. was ok, but you should convert 6S to 6NT.

You could argue, that the 5th spade and the ten of spade warrants an upgrade,
and that this is enough to blast 7NT, but the seq. was ok.

You choose science, ... it did not work out, that is ok.
MP is usally won by avoiding lots of zeros, 40% is ok, 60% is ok, but a zero is bad.
Cohen: Try to win the tournament at another bord, try to avoid loosing the
touranment with the current bord.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[jdiana]

pescetom, on 2024-July-20, 06:35, said:

BTW there was good reason to post this in the robot discussion forum. Not only is the range of 5NT debatable, but the system explains 5NT as a quantitative invite to 7NT whereas the Gib System Notes explain it as choice of game 6S/6NT.

I agree. The fact that the explanations don't match GIB's system notes is concerning. Do the system notes need to be updated? Especially for someone who is, say, a casual player who decides to enter the robot NABC, not being able to rely on the system notes is a problem, especially if people who play robot games all the time make note of the differences and have (yet another) advantage.

[jdiana]

I think Gerber would have been OK here. Presumably, if the robot had one more HCP it would have super accepted with 3♠. I'm not sure how GIB interprets subsequent responder bids after a super-accept, but they should be control bids and 4NT should be RKC.

BTW, I'm not sure 7NT is a slam dunk. Based on the bidding, you could have a combined 35 HCP, which means you could theoretically be missing an ace or a king that needs to be finessed. But maybe I'm too conservative.

[thepossum]

jdiana, on 2024-July-21, 07:37, said:

I think Gerber would have been OK here. Presumably, if the robot had one more HCP it would have super accepted with 3♠. I'm not sure how GIB interprets subsequent responder bids after a super-accept, but they should be control bids and 4NT should be RKC.

BTW, I'm not sure 7NT is a slam dunk. Based on the bidding, you could have a combined 35 HCP, which means you could theoretically be missing an ace or a king that needs to be finessed. But maybe I'm too conservative.

If we can find the spade fit and know all the controls its a fairly strong chance 7NT - for me I would have bid it

[helene_t]

The robot doesn't superaccept often enough. I am not sure what it is waiting for if it doesn't superaccept with this hand. Maybe better trumps?

Also, 6♠ is very pesimistic. 7♠ seems obvious.

I think your bidding was perfect given the constraints of the GIB system. If you had a natural forcing 3♠, or some generic force after the transfer, it would be fine. But with the GIB system, the only alternative is to fake some second suit. I wouldn't do that although it might have worked on this hand.

[thepossum]

Thx

I just regret at least not going to 6NT+1

EDIT Just reading about pick a slam - not the 5NT I bid - but you only use it for small slams. Help
Partner picked a decent slam in spades I guess. Is it safe to raise to 7??
I put it through my favorite bidding engine in various systems. All ended in 6
I should say that one person did bid the "obvious" 7NT for 100%