wbartley

Good one.

How can this be the worst? Per the explanations given for each of the bids there are only two kooky bids in this auction, 4♠ and 5♣. If 5♣ does, in fact, show 29 points then the 7♥ bid is perfectly reasonable. What I don't get is that the 7♥ bot seems to be interpreting the 5♣ bid as showing 29 as per the explanation. So, why does the other bot bid it, if that's what it actually shows?

This might be the most egregious example of not taking a preference I've seen so far. Just play bridge robots. Human South. [hv=pc=n&s=sa3hq8dqj64ckt742&w=skjt965h9642dc653&n=sq8742hajdkt53cq8&e=shkt753da9872caj9&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=pp1s2sdpp3ddppp]399|300[/hv]

Just play bridge robots. Human South. [hv=pc=n&s=shakt973dq8cakqj5&w=saq742hjdajt72c62&n=s953hq64dk43ct843&e=skjt86h852d965c97&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=p2cp2dp2hp4hp6hppp]399|300[/hv] The explanation for 4♥ was, 3+♥; 4- HCP. No money was on the line, so of course I bid six anyway.

When you describe pass as "pretty bad" I'm reminded of a famous quote by the physicist Wolfgang Pauli who once said of a colleague's work, "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." Pass isn't pretty bad or even really bad. It's preposterous. The worst you can say about the balancing double is that it's aggressive.

No need to apologize. Just trying to get it on the list, even if it's at the end. By the way, Josh, did you happen to see my other recent post about the pass of a forcing 2♠ bid in the inverted minor sequence? That one should be moved up the list. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/78493-horrendous-bug/

There is no rationale. This is what we in the software industry call a bug - behavior different from what the implementer intended.

Pass. Your cards are all in the wrong place and your partner is probably passing a double.

This has to be a newly introduced issue. Just play bridge robots. Human South. [hv=pc=n&s=sah654da63ckq6543&w=sq9654hj97dqjcj98&n=s872hakqtdt97ca72&e=skjt3h832dk8542ct&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1cp2cp2hp2sppp]399|300[/hv]

I'm guessing you're joking but 7♣ doubled, down 2 at this vulnerability is 500 and West has 2 tricks for sure against 7♣

It amended the explanation. I assumed, probably incorrectly, that if it amends the explanation it recognizes the bid. The explanation does say that 4NT shows at least 55 in the minors and 18+ points. By the way, some of us post here because we're trying to help make GIB better, not to know what bids to avoid.

How is pass okay? What do you take? Three tricks in 4NT? The explanation even says that 4NT shows the minors, unlike in my example where it doesn't even recognize 4NT as a takeout bid.

Just play bridge robots. Human South. [hv=pc=n&s=sa7hkj8432dcakt65&w=st8643haqt95dq3c3&n=skqj9h76dkj752cj7&e=s52hdat9864cq9842&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=p1hp1sp2cp2np4cp4hp4sp5hp6hppp]399|300[/hv] The explanation of 4♠ was, cue bid. The explanation of 5♥ was no ♣AK; no ♦AK, blah blah blah. Well, needless to say, North holding no top honors in clubs or diamonds was music to my ears. Never mind that North DOES have the K of diamonds. But obviously, the real laugh is that I was allowed to play 6♥ undoubled with West holding four trump tricks.

Just play bridge robots. Human South. [hv=pc=n&s=sa3ha97daj6ckqj93&w=sk98765hqj82dkqc7&n=sqjhk64dt8543ca52&e=st42ht53d972ct864&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1sppdp1np3nppp&p=s2s3sksjh8hkh3h7d3d2dadkdjdqd4d7hqh4ht]399|300[/hv] GIB had a perfectly good diamond suit but I guess it saw that GIB was on lead so it was unlikely to lead its partner's suit and if by some miracle it did, GIB West wouldn't continue it.

The title of this post is, "GIB doesn't recognize normal bid." The blurb indicated as much. My purpose in posting it was that hopefully the GIB programmers will change it so GIB does recognize it as a takeout bid. I wasn't looking for opinions about the choice of 4NT over Dbl. But since two of you decided to offer one, when holding a hand very similar to the North hand here, a world class player by the name of Steve Weinstein opted to pass a double of 4♠ and a large number of world class players agreed with his decision. The problem is that South could very easily hold A AKxx Qxxx Axxx where 4♠ is off three or four and 5 clubs has very little chance - and that's a good south hand. South would double 4♠ with A AKxx Kxxx Qxxx. Now 4♠ is off 2 or 3 and 5♣ might just get doubled for -200 or worse. To put it another way. If you don't bid 4NT with this hand, what does a South hand that bids 4NT look like to you?

4 hearts, biddable clubs, 11+ points. Something like that. I believe it was mentioned above.

Just play bridge robots. Human South. [hv=pc=n&s=sa52haq643d64cqt6&w=sk6h952dkqt82ca83&n=sj97hjt7d753ckj54&e=sqt843hk8daj9c972&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1dp1sp1npp2hp3cppp]399|300[/hv] The explanation for 3♣ was 15+ HCP or some such nonsense.

3♣ is 11+. Why would GIB bid 3NT with AJ9x behind the spade bidder and a 13 point hand? After all, partner might only have 11 points.

4NT is a standard takeout bid. GIB should recognize it as such. End of story.

Just play bridge robots. Human South. [hv=pc=n&s=shaqj5dk982caqt95&w=sat765h9872dat63c&n=sq3h63dj754ck8743&e=skj9842hkt4dqcj62&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=2sd4spp4nppp]399|300[/hv] This is a standard takeout action over a preemptive jump to 4♠.

I don't think one should have to have a suit that plays well in game opposite a singleton in order to be able to bid 3♥. What's the point of bidding 3♥ at all if that's the case? I could just bid 4♥ since the chances GIB has a void in hearts are rather small. In fact, North holds 1.6 hearts on average and a void only about 14% of the time. If 3♥ isn't asking if North has more hearts than average then I don't know what it means. Give South AJxxxx of hearts and everything else the same and 5♦ has play while 4♥ is completely hopeless.

Just play bridge robots. Human South. [hv=pc=n&s=skqt8h843d87cakj6&w=s943hqt65dqc87432&n=sj6ha972dkj52cqt5&e=sa752hkjdat9643c9&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=pp1ddp2dp2sp3hp3sppp]399|300[/hv] GIB description of the South hand is exactly what I have. GIB has a psychotic aversion to bidding 3NT. There's no way that 3♠ on a 4-2 fit stands a better chance than 3NT.

Just play bridge robot. Human South [hv=pc=n&s=s3hq763dkj2cak975&w=skt8764hk52da976c&n=saj95ha98dq854cqt&e=sq2hjt4dt3cj86432&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp1h1sdp3cp3hp3nppp&p=stsjsqs3c8c5s4ctcqc2c7s8d4d3dkdad7d5dtdjcah2s5c6cks7h8c4d2d6d8h4dqc3c9d9sas2h3s6s9cjh6skh5h9hthqh7hkha]399 |300[/hv] Bidding is a little wacky by me but GIB's description for each of my bids matches the hand. The question is why doesn't GIB (North) bid 3NT over 3♣?

Just play bridge robot. Human South. [hv=pc=n&s=sak5hkj5432da4c42&w=sj8743ht6d2cat973&n=st6h9dkjt9753cqj8&e=sq92haq87dq86ck65&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=3dp3hp4hppp]399|300[/hv] The 3♥ bid was a bit speculative, I know, but I had tolerance for diamonds and figured we'd be okay in 4♦ if GIB didn't like hearts. Unfortunately for me, a singleton was all it needed to decide it liked them.

If you just eliminate 7 card minors from the East hand, 1000 samples produces the correct answer very reliably. On my puny desktop it takes about 10 milliseconds to run 1000 samples and compute the statistics.