E Laurvick

I was just forced by BBO to get the new version. So, I started a game with the robots to see how it works. A few issues. The worst one is that once a trick is turned, it disappears. The first six tricks were played, I got distracted and now I don't remember if I lost one trick or two. Even in the most stringent bridge games, all players are always allowed to see how many tricks (and which ones) have been won be each side. Are we supposed to start noting each trick, which pair won or lost it?

I think the programmers need to teach the robots a lesson I learned the first time I played bridge. If your partner has bid a suit, LEAD THAT SUIT. I've noticed this on hand after hand. I bid and rebid a suit, the robot leads something else, the contract makes. It's especially frustrating when the robot holds a singleton or doubleton in the suit I bid. This has happened so many times I think it has been totally omitted from the program.

Is there any way to get absolutely incorrect explanations changed or are we stuck with continually guessing? On a hand tonight the explanation was that the robot's raise of my suit showed at least two card support. Dummy came down with a void. In my suit. I don't know what the bid really meant, a correct explanation would have been helpful.

I've been playing with the robots for a couple of weeks. I have YET to have one of them pass my penalty doubles. The last time it happened my robot partner, who had never bid, passed my three bids, then when I doubled the opponents at the four level, rescued (to the wrong suit) with an ACE! I've decided the only thing the robots are good for is to practice dummy play. Often in ridiculous contracts.

I think the title says it all. I get to play an extraordinary number of hands, almost always either one too high when my robot partner makes a ridiculous bid over what I thought was the final contract, or one too low (such as passing my slam try with an Ace more than already shown). I'm not going to bother listing hands here, just a general comment. Good for practicing play of the hand. Lousy for practicing defense. Have you noticed your robot partner almost NEVER leads any suit you have bid?

OK, I found the convention card. Hate it. I'll skip the robot bridge unless someday I have the option to skip conventions I detest. Good luck to you all!

I've just discovered Robot Bridge, seems like an interesting idea, tried a couple of games, AND . . . I cannot figure out what kind of system it's playing. Yesterday my robot partner was playing 2/1 with forcing NT (that's what it said in the little box when it bid 1 NT), tonight I got one that had no system, no judgment and lied about its HCP. Is there such a thing as a novice robot? Anyway . . . the description says "ACBL GCC applies." I suppose that's referring to an ACBL convention card, but what does the "G" stand for? I really need to figure out what's going on or I'm not going to throw away any more money and time. As I said before, it does seem like an interesting idea, but not if it has me pounding the desk in frustration.

OK. Call who? Is there a phone number somewhere I haven't found yet? Is there an email address I can use. I sure can't find one on the site.

I was puzzled by the Director's ruling tonight, and what's worse is that I can't find any way to contest it. I KNOW in an ACBL game, if declarer claims without stating a line of play, s/he cannot take any finesses and any doubtful tricks go to the opponents. When declarer claimed, he would have to take a finesse in a suit that hadn't been played yet, and he had no way of knowing if it would succeed. I rejected the claim and called the director. Play was frozen, of course. The director arrived, blew me off and accepted the claim. Down one doubled, should have been down two doubled. Do we have any recourse, or is it just a waste of time to call the director in a case like this? All I did was hold up the game.

I think your double followed by a suit is correct. In both SAYC and 2/1 that shows extra points, and you could have as little as 10 HCP for your initial double. And your heart bid promises a five-card suit. This has been standard bidding for as long as I've been playing. The robot absolutely should be able to judge this situation and correct to 3 hearts.

I have a problem with the 2/1 convention card. In several places, the line for description/explanation/clarification is quite long, but I can only type in 8 or 10 characters. Not only a waste of space, but no full explanation is possible, even with abbreviations. I really feel better if my opponents know our full understandings, but questions take too long and they don't see it. A good example is under NOTRUMP OPENING BIDS My favorite partner and I play System on over Doubles and any bid at the two level. All I can type in is "2 level" and this is misleading! Just "Dbl" is also misleading. Why can't this space be freed up for us to use?

I'm used to ACBL tournaments, so I'm trying to figure out where BBO is different. Tonight, playing in a Speedball tournament, it was my turn to bid when my RHO called the Director. There is no explanation when this happens, and I had no idea what the problem was. However, as I do in regular ACBL games, I waited for the director to arrive. Eventually I was told to bid, which I did. When we had finished the hands, I asked my opponent why he called the Director and he said I was taking too long to bid. He also said I should not have waited, I should just have continued bidding. Is this correct? Personally, I think his director call was out of line. I am not a slow player and we finished all three boards in spite of the difficult slam my partner and I bid (which made easily). If he was out of line, does BBO make a note of unnecessary director calls? My partner and I discussed it later and we both think he may have done it to try to throw us off, since we were obviously exploring for a slam. I don't know who to ask about his. I sent an email inquiry but haven't received a response. I hope BBO monitors this forum and someone will tell me what the proper procedure is when a Director is called.

I was told by another player that we can be barred if our board completion rate is too low, but I can't find any reference to it anywhere. Is that true? Several times recently I've been stuck at a table where one player failed to respond at all. Another couple of times someone lost connectivity, their seat was reserved, but they never returned. It seems the host can't boot them in that case. I had been giving up and leaving after waiting at least five minutes, but now my board completion rate has dropped from 100% to 99%. What am I supposed to do? My solution now is to apologize to my partner and walk away from the computer, not leaving the table. Eventually someone will boot me. That hardly seems fair either. Any suggestions?

Thank you.

After a year or so of playing only in the Main Bridge Club, I've decided to give the ACBL BBO tournaments a try. Until I get some regular partners, that means the Individual events. I've only played in three of them, so I'm still figuring it out. One thing is not clear to me --- it says "no enemies". If I flag someone as an enemy, does that mean only that I won't get that person as a partner, or does it mean that person won't ever be at my table?

I read this thread because I like Flannery. It gives a LOT of information in a hurry. However, I don't understand the statements that responder must have 5 spades to bid 1 spade over 1 heart, because "opener cannot have four spades". When I was still playing in ACBL tournaments a few years ago, there was a strict rule that Flannery showed exactly 11 to 15 HCP and exactly 4-5 in the majors. Any deviation got an unfavorable ruling from the director. If responder did not have game-going values, and opener had 4-5-2-2 distribution with 16 HCP, OR 4-6-2-1 distribution, the spade suit would be lost because opener HAD to open 1 Heart. Has the ACBL relaxed its rules on this convention? Can people now open Flannery with a six-card heart suit or have a stronger hand?