No
the correct bid is 2 NT. We do NOT overbid at matchpoints and partner has
a chance to raise to 3 NT so it is a partnership agreement which makes for good
results
If I were East with West my human partner, I would view the first DBL as Takeout, promising "tolerance" in the two unbid suits. The definition of "tolerance" has loosened considerably these days. Ideally, West holds at least 4 cards in both hearts & diamonds, especially hearts. Given that Opener is being forced to the three level, I would expect West to hold at least 10 points.
A standard rule of defensive bidding is to try to avoid letting the opponents play at the two level in a suit where they have found a fit. I would consequently also view the second "balancing seat" DBL by West as Takeout, saying "partner, bid something". Holding six clubs, East does well to rebid their clubs, giving NS the choice of raising to the three level in spades OR letting EW play the hand in 3C.
What is the meaning of the two DBLs by Robot West? I have no idea.
I believe the Robots are programmed in a system called GIB. I checked out GIB just long enough to discover it was different, sometimes bizarrely so, from the two bidding systems with which I am familiar (Standard American - Two Over One). I have no desire whatsoever to try to learn GIB. Looks like this might be a time when GIB means the same.
[Editors Note. BBO explains GIB:
" The robots used on BBO are called GIB (Ginsberg's Intelligent Bridgeplayer.) GIB is widely considered to be one of the best computer bridge programs ever created. It is occasionally capable of brilliance. It is also occasionally capable of some really poor bids and plays (just like all human players). "]
The good news is that in the online games I play it is possible to hover over any bid made by a Robot for an explanation of what that bid promises. Equally important, it is also possible to hover over any bid I am about to make for an explanation of what that bid will mean to the Robot (often very different than what I was intending it to mean).
The bad news is I have discovered the Robots lie, sometimes flagrantly. I have hovered over Robot bids promising a particular Ace that they prove not to have. Sometime I can actually see that Ace in my own hand. I have been frustrated so often by lying Robots that I have recently vowed to never again participate in any online games that include Robot players.
Of course, as all bridge players are well aware, the word "never" means almost never. And the word "always" means almost always.
Ain't bridge a great game?
Mark:
I mean this very seriously.
There's an old saying that I think is valid. If you don't double some contracts that turn out to be cold, you are not doubling enough.
Many terrible results are due to a failure to double when there is no certainty of setting the contract. In a duplicate game, the auction makes it sound like the same contract will be reached everywhere and the East hand will often double. If everyone in 4S goes down, which is more likely than not, then everyone who fails to double will get a bad score, assuming the same tricks are won and lost at most tables. Even in a team game I would double with the East hand. As long as there are no overtricks, the IMP loss for doubling a cold game is surprisingly small, typically 5 IMPs. You gain a lot if you set the contract 2 or 3 tricks. Moreover, you have an intangible gain as your opponents avoid bold bidding against you in the future. Only at rubber bridge would I not double 4 spades on the bidding shown. That's because of the chance that the double could help declarer find an unlikely line of play to make a game that would be defeated without the warning.
Knowing that the opponents are facing a 5-0 trump break, a fact they couldn't have known when they bid game, makes it likely that they will take a couple fewer tricks than they expected.
This hand was unlucky for East. South bid very aggressively with 3 Spades. I'm surprised that North, with significantly more than he might have had to bid 4 didn't make a slight move toward a possible slam by cue- bidding 4 hearts. South would have declined, of course, having less, rather than more, than a minimum for the 3 S bid, but E could be dissuaded from doubling, knowing that N had some thoughts of slam.
In a game with human opponents at an actual table, I'd think about whether there had been unintended but inappropriate information that kept N from bidding more actively. For instance, suppose South fingered the 2 spade bid before pulling out the 3S card, I would call the director.
If I
were the director with those hypothetical facts established, I'd award an
adjusted score of 4 spades un- doubled. I think 4 spades will make most of the
time, even without the warning double. If there's a likely play that would lead
to going down absent the double, I'd award an un- doubled set to the defenders,
provided they didn't defend carelessly.
We
can’t reverse in an opponent’s suit. When we bid the opponent’s suit, we are
cue bidding and are asking for a stopper or showing a good hand. Looking at the
hand, I would have bid 1NT. Nothing is perfect, but I have 2 stoppers and a
source of tricks, plus I’m still at the one-level so I have better than a good
chance to make 1 or 2 NT.
Hope
this helps,
Glenna
The longer you play bridge, the more ways you will learn to evaluate the strength of your hands. In my two part Beginning Bridge course I teach three basic methods.
Point Count: A common partnership agreement is that an opening bid of 1NT should promise 15-17 HCPS. The above opening hand is at the top of that range. Given that point count is considered the primary hand evaluation criterion, going to game based on point count alone would be automatic for many players.
Quick Tricks: Common agreement is that a standard opening hand should include at least 2.0 Quick Tricks. The above opening hand has 3.5 Quick Tricks, significantly stronger than standard. The Quick Trick count screams "go to game".
Losers: Common agreement is that a standard opening hand should have no more than 7 losers. The above opening hand does have exactly 7 Losers. No reason to worry here.
Taken as a group, the three evaluations above clearly identify a hand that is strong enough to accept an invitation to game.
Note: If you are a player who is not already routinely evaluating your hands for Quick Tricks & Losers, I would encourage you to start doing so. Don't know how? Sign up for the Beginning Bridge course I expect to be teaching live at the Bridge Club in January//February 2023.
Ain't bridge a great game.
Mark:
Another interesting competitive bidding hand. West's negative double is near the low end of the range for a negative double, but I agree with it and would have done the same. You promise at least 4 cards in each of the remaining 2 suits and enough strength to suggest competing.
Since E-W are not vulnerable, you could afford to go down 1 or even 2 (if un- doubled) and show a profit compared to minus 110 or 130. You could have a stronger (even opening bid strength) hand with 4+ distribution in the unbid suits.
If West has the stronger hand, the next bid must be invitational,
forcing or game, as appropriate. If W has a very weak hand, much weaker than
this one, that should be Alerted, assuming that E knows that to be a real
possibility. Otherwise, N-S could claim to be injured if they are talked out of
competing further. Such a weak double wouldn't be "illegal" but
outside of the usual expectations that opponents would typically rely on; hence
the Alert.2 NT could be set 100 on the likely club lead, which might be an OK
score compared to most N-S pairs bidding and making several clubs.
If E bids 2 hearts after the negative double it
usually shows a 6 card suit. However, this 5 card suit is so strong, a lot of
players, me included, would bid 2 hearts. It's hard to be sure how the play
would go on the actual hand. It might be no better than NT. If S is an
enterprising bidder, she will bid 3 clubs because of the lovely suit. If she is
conservative, she will pass because of the limited points. If 2 hearts is
passed by S and comes back to north, a double by N in the pass-out seat is
"reopening" or "D.S.I" (Do something intelligent). In this
case, whether South re- bids clubs or passes the double, it looks intelligent(
for bidding) or brilliant (for passing.) I would bid. It looks too risky to pass.
Most roads lead to a N-S plus score, so holding it to 100 or less should be OK
for E-W.
North's 1st bid should be 3 ♠️ showing 11 or 12 points. If you play that a jump is weak,
then North must cue bid ♦️ to show a limit raise or
better. South was very, very brave to bid 4 ♠️ when his partner only showed 6-10. Hope this helps.
Glenna
