Jyrki_63

A tip: Mouseover your 3S bid. From its explanation you see that this bid denies a 4 card heart suit (the explanation says 2-3 H). GIB will stick to believing in that. So if you want to show both majors you have to reply 3H to Stayman. No way to show 54. I would not open 2NT with good 54 majors anyway.

Since I voted "other", it behooves me to scribble down an explanation. Basically this is a good idea - for the reasons repeated many times over. I very much like it in the 25 cent games as well as the $1 55% target MPs - given the extra time. I have given up on the Robot Races, but it does seem to me that it might be nice to have GIB declare its share of hands in that format. It's a well known RR gambit to steer GIB to declare, when you absolutely need the points, and time is running out. I would suggest that you poll more RR players for their opinions. Other than this minor reservation: Thumbs up!

Of course B-) I do realize how difficult it is to code "captaincy". Passing 6H would have been 90%+ ;)

Fair enough, if feeling lucky (or in need of a top), I should just blast. Not criticizing GIB really. Just curious about the IMHO contradictory definitions of the bids.

At least GIB is consistent about not doubling a grand when holding the trump ace. Grand in hearts? Ruined my $1 55% tourney to boot. :( But wish I knew, why GIB thought a grand in hearts here would lead to higher MP score than 6NT. I guess some genius will soon explain that a simulation showed that hearts play one trick better. There are times when GIB should not be allowed to do simulations. When you have given a complete and accurate description of your hand, and your partner then places the contract, you are not entitled to an opinion.

The bidding goes Me GIB 1D 1S 3D 4D ? I held AKx, QTx, AQxxxx, A, so a slam may be on (4D promised 9-11 and 2+ support), if we have a heart control and GIB has the DK. How to find? Let's check the alternatives. 4S - Hmm. The explanation says that this shows 4-card support, 6+ diamonds and a strong hand. Why would anyone hide a major suit support for one round is beyond me, but I'm a simple man. A bit suspect? 4NT - well, won't ask about hearts, so this is out. 5C - an honest cue! But, wait? The explanation tells that in addition to promising a club control, this denies a heart control (good) and denies a spade control (WTF?). Well, one of the explanations must be off. I gambled on it being the explanation of 4S, and bid it (given that a misinterpretation will not be spectacularly wrong). Naturally GIB passed with KTx diamonds, a singleton heart and QJ to five spades. No foul breaks, so twelve tricks (HA lead). Hand I wasn't alone. Only two players found the slam. One blasted it, the other fired the ole' Black. But here's the question. If 4S shows a desire to play in spades (why it would promise 4 is still beyond me), then 5C can not deny the SA. Something is not right? Not a major problem, of course. Just one that roboplayers should know about. Punting a slam or two may be best?

Has anybody else noticed unusually slow play by GIB today? I just barely managed to complete a recent 25 minute 8 board tournament (luckily I had saved enough time early on). On late hands both GIB defenders were tanking on every other card. That's ok occasionally, but surely not at tricks 12 and 13 (yes, trick 13 took something like 15 seconds on one of the hands). Is there a load problem? Or is this something that only affects users like me, who are so used to the Windows client that... I also want to share a hand from yesterday. Partnering GIB at MPs I dealt and held this moose: AKQ942,-,AKT9532,-. What do you open? If I held the red suits I might consider opening 1D, and rebid 6H (just for the heck of it), but I have the boss suit, so the opponents might not compete. No, this is a one-loser hand, and has decent play for a grand opposite a suitable yarborough so 2C it is (I should have known that GIB may have problems giving a preference...). GIB replies a positive 2H, so I sigh of relief in that I will likely get to show both suits. First the longer, so I rebid 3D. Then GIB surprises me with a leap to 6NT! Oh dear! So it has an opening bid. If it is at all balanced 7NT might have play. GIB has endplayed me into not showing my spades, and I do have two voids, so I suggest 7D. This was not a success, because GIB held 75, AQJ963, 4, AKQ3, so there was an inescapable trump loser. The brave souls who had the sense to bid spades first, and managed to get a preference to 7S had their lucky day, because both spades and diamonds split 32, so one diamond ruff brought in all thirteen tricks. 6NT by GIB scored 50%, and was a better contract because often defenders allowed GIB to sluff the dealer's small spades on dummys high cards, so it only needed diamonds to play for one loser. So while the leap to 6NT would be called "uncultured" in certain circles, I can't really blame GIB :huh: :(

FWIW I have always thought that this 2S rebid is a sign-off. The same as it would be without reverse (say 1H-1S-2D-2S), so 7- rather than 7+. How else do you describe a hand with loong spades and may be 21 or 22 in the reds? Strong clubbers may have an immediate weak jump available, but naturalists don't. The point is kinda moot, because apparently GIB plays it as forcing for one round. It wouldn't hurt to have "F1" in the alerts. Granted, we are supposed to know most of the situations, but as this hand shows, there is enough variation around the world.

Here is a similar strange 3-level bid. Why Diamonds? Does GIB think this is a good time to make a forward going bid after we have both signed off? If so, it should be alerted as forcing. I played GIB for 25 in the reds and passed. Something like H:xx, D:AJ9xx. With stronger/longer diamonds it should have bid 2D over my 2C. If GIB wants to compete (as it probably should), I fail to see what's wrong with 3C? Surely my bidding shows that my clubs are longer than diamonds, so why volunteer to a 3-level contract with a weak 7-card fit at best? IMHO there cannot be a hand that would make a forcing bid at this juncture, so GIB has to choose between 3C (my choice) and 3H.

Barmar, thank you very much for looking into this. Duly appreciated. I have trouble accepting that my 4H bid was wrong, but so it seems. <_< A few questions remain: 1) How was I supposed to show a heart suit that is rebiddable but not twice rebiddable? My 3H only showed a suit like KJxx (alert says 4+ hearts) in a hand that didn't want to reopen with a double. If I rebid hearts, then I'm suddenly showing AKQxxx or better! How do I check for 3-card support? I guess a direct 4H shows 5, and a case could be made for that bid, but this hand has too many losers vs. a yarborough for the bid to appeal to me. Remember that the opposing 2S bid tells that at least one of my suits is not breaking. 2) I surely cannot hold that moose! A) that hand is either a 2C or a 1H opening, not a 1C-opening, B) my reply to RKCB would have been 3+ void (6D IIRC), C) Wouldn't GIB want to be in 7C opposite that hand? @Antrax, I'm fairly sure that GIB intended hearts to be the keycard suit, so my 6C showed HQ and KC.

Even if my bidding had promised a 6-card heart suit (I don't think I did, but it is not entirely clear to me what is GIB's definition of a "twice rebiddable" suit), then I should still have longer clubs, and GIB should place me with -, AKQxxx, -, Kxxxxxx, and its preference is still incomprehensible. Furthermore, GIB could blame me that 7C was not on :-) If this is too difficult to code, may be it would be easier for GIB to bid according to a 4-card major opening system, where there are no systemic exceptions to the rule that the first bid suit is the longest? Does GIB not maintain a list of possible patterns compatible with my bidding? There are only 560 possible patterns, so the list would not be very long for a computer program?

Something went wrong here Slam choice After my 4H bid I think that I had bid promised 5+ hearts and longer clubs since I opened clubs and bid and rebid hearts. It was not clear to me which suit was meant to be trumps, but as GIB later asked for the queen it must have been hearts, so my 6C response showed HQ and CK. Given this, what kind of a simulation propelled GIB to think that (opposite its singleton hearts and AQT clubs) hearts would make a better trump suit? Did I manage to mislead it with an earlier bid? We shall never know, whether I would have managed 6C. Others went down due to the bad heart split, but if you take exactly two high hearts before ruffing one, there is time to recover: ruff two hearts and take advantage of the 22-club split.

Hopefully you or GIB's partner congratulated the declarer on a fine play :-)

Hi, I seem to have missed something. Strange rebid description My 3NT rebid may be questionable, but this is our last chance to reach 3NT. I was gambling that either my diamonds or GIBs clubs run, and that we have 9 quick winners. GIB jumped to slam. Not a hopeless slam on a spade lead, but at my table the GIB correctly hanged on to its diamonds, and I only made 11 tricks. GIBs jump is a bit frisky (a fair shot?). My question revolves around the description of the 3NT rebid, because a closer examination reveals that GIB thinks I promised 17 TPs. This baffles me. The opps have bid up to 3S. I have a spade stopper, GIB most likely does not. Why would 3NT promise anything else but a spade stopper in a minimumish hand? Mind you. I should have made the slam. East is under tremendous pressure when the clubs are run, and came down to the singleton HA and DQTxx. If only I had kept the heart spots and discarded the fourth diamond, when it became apparent that East is hanging on to a diamond stopper. After clubs exit with a heart to the bare ace, win 3 diamond tricks on the enforced D-return and cash the HK for the slam-going trick. Instead I was hoping for the diamonds to run, too, and hoped to score an overtrick ;-) 6NT-1 was worth 77%

Well. I once raised GIBs 1H response to my 1m opening with Kxx and a goodish 14 TP. When I later offered 3NT as an alternative (a human would take that as "choice of games", i.e. expressing doubt about hearts, GIB put itself to 4H with a trump suit of 6542! It is not catering for its partner to do this with only 3 ;-)

Siding with GIB here. It is North's duty to act over the second TOX, and 3C is the most descriptive call. Remember that a raise after an opposing TOX may already be a stretch.

Hi, First time posting here. Hopefully including the link to the hand works out. Misfit hands are dfficult to bid under the best of conditions (=with extra strength), so why is GIB overbidding without any known fit? After the latest upgrade the "2-suited invite 10-12" has occurred at least twice. On both occasions I would have evaluated the hand closer to 7 as a responder. 2-suited invite Here 4C seems quite a stretch. Given that I had about an ace more than the bare minimum for my bidding GIB only went down 2. That was only -0.27 IMPs, because the field was in the same spot. Yet it seems ill-advised to go beyond 3NT to simply show one's shape with a hand that has very few HCP and no known fit. In the case were openere has showed the other two suits GIB is doing it in spite of the evidence telling that no fit exists. I realize that it is very difficult to design a simple program that could bid reasonably well. But many a bidding sin would not be committed, if GIB simply refrained from adding points for shortness unless an 8-card fit is located (or it owns a solid 6-7 card suit itself). Why does GIB thank that the example hand is worth pushing to the four level given that I am expected to have at least 9 cards in the reds? If it wants to invite, why not 2NT?