[1eyedjack]

---

MP, robot tourney, best hand South.

The par contract is 4♦X -1 by N/S, for 100 to E/W, who can make 3♠. Against the room, had we been allowed to play in 4♦, doubled or otherwise, it would have been a good score for N/S. Obviously defending 4♠ would have scored even better (for N/S).

What do all y'all think of the bidding on this one? My opinion is that it was fine up to but excluding the 4♠ bid, with 5♦ bid being the worse bid of the two.
West appears to be sacrificing at the 4 level against a partscore, which to me is a bit of a no-no. He can't be bidding it to make, because he has no more reason to expect it to make when bidding 4♠ as he had on the previous round of the bidding at which time he judged 3♠ to be sufficient. Actually, if West had chosen 4♠ on the previous round I would not have considered that unreasonable, despite its failure.

Apparently the route to get to 4♦ and then stop is for South to pass 2♦ and then back in with 4♦ when they get to 3♠ (and you escape undoubled for a bonus).

I don't think that South's 2♥ response is ludicrous, but I am happy to be corrected. Anyway, the bid is "forcing to 3♦". By implication, while it may be strong enough for game, it allows for the possibility of stopping short.

I don't know what North's pass of 2♠ means, given that we are forced to 3♦, and in particular how it might be distinguished from (say) 3♦ bid by North. However let us at least agree that North is minimum in context in every respect, and we assume that the pass is consistent with this.

South's 3♦ appears to be a limit bid, and non-forcing.

So, South has made a non-forcing bid, and North has (and we imagine has shown) a minimum opener.

I feel that armed with that preceding information and auction, South should be permitted to contest the partscore over 3♠ without being hung by North. If 3♦ is non-forcing then logically so must be 4♦, if in between these bids North has shown no encouragement. It may be that North would not have bid 5♦ had West passed 4♦. I have no way of knowing.

One of the improvements to GIB that I look forward to seeing in future releases is where GIB stops bidding one more for the road, having already fully described his hand in a non-forcing situation and is not in the pass-out seat.

[RSClyde]

4♠ is terrible, 5♦ is beyond terrible.

[Lord Molyb]

RSClyde, on 2013-November-10, 09:59, said:

4♠ is terrible, 5♦ is beyond terrible.

you forgot 2NT