[1eyedjack]

---

MP, Instant, 35

Over 4D, by North, South's options are 4H = cue, 4S = cue, 4N = RKC in D

Over my 4H, 4N by N is RKC in D. I actually bid 4H cue in the hope of eliciting 4N Bwood from partner. In that respect the operation was successful but the patient died.

I have to accept that there is not a lot of bidding space, and sometimes pre-empts work. That said, I am not enamoured of the systemic options available. I think we should do away with Bwood here.

Of passing interest, the winning action on the South hand is to protect with X rather than 3N, which North miraculously guesses accurately to convert to penalties, despite having a 6 card suit in which partner has implied support.

So he is happy to sit for the double, but over 3N has to virtually commit to slam?

[cloa513]

1eyedjack, on 2016-April-02, 17:29, said:

---

MP, Instant, 35

Over 4D, by North, South's options are 4H = cue, 4S = cue, 4N = RKC in D

Over my 4H, 4N by N is RKC in D. I actually bid 4H cue in the hope of eliciting 4N Bwood from partner. In that respect the operation was successful but the patient died.

I have to accept that there is not a lot of bidding space, and sometimes pre-empts work. That said, I am not enamoured of the systemic options available. I think we should do away with Bwood here.

Of passing interest, the winning action on the South hand is to protect with X rather than 3N, which North miraculously guesses accurately to convert to penalties, despite having a 6 card suit in which partner has implied support.

So he is happy to sit for the double, but over 3N has to virtually commit to slam?

the logical choice for north is pass over 3nt- dont rescue.

[lycier]

Real good topic .

I replayed your hand, I found there are several different .

1- The sequences Gibs play normally.

---

Result : 4♣S-2

2- After I bid 3NT,then let Gib take my seat to play.

---

Result: 3NTS=

3- After I bid 3NT and 4♦ respectively, then let Gibs take my seat to play.

---

Result : 4♦N-3

I guess my conclusions should be :
1- Here is difficult to define. Perhaps there are no alternative options.
2- Here some bids are not to be define in fact.
Sorry, I am a layman, just saying.

[lycier]

I don't have access to the data, I have no way to make my conclusion.

[iandayre]

1eyedjack, on 2016-April-02, 17:29, said:

---

MP, Instant, 35

Over 4D, by North, South's options are 4H = cue, 4S = cue, 4N = RKC in D

Over my 4H, 4N by N is RKC in D. I actually bid 4H cue in the hope of eliciting 4N Bwood from partner. In that respect the operation was successful but the patient died.

I have to accept that there is not a lot of bidding space, and sometimes pre-empts work. That said, I am not enamoured of the systemic options available. I think we should do away with Bwood here.

Of passing interest, the winning action on the South hand is to protect with X rather than 3N, which North miraculously guesses accurately to convert to penalties, despite having a 6 card suit in which partner has implied support.

So he is happy to sit for the double, but over 3N has to virtually commit to slam?

Agree on all counts. N should pass 3NT. If 4D is bid, 4NT should be to play. And passing a double with the N hand is poor.