The_Badger

Thanks iandayre, Didn't know BBO are sole owner of GIB. Maybe they should encourage players to report faults and anomalies by awarding BB$ to players that do. They have purchased BB$ to play against the robots, so when the Bots do something wrong or illogical it's only fair that they are compensated in kind. To be fair, GIB is a brilliant bridge program, but it's far from perfect as quite a few commentators have illustrated on these discussion forums.

Ok, I admit I got this totally wrong :( but this sort of hand crops up once in a blue moon, and that's why bridge is vicarious and can be so cruel. A decision, practically a guess, can turn matches. Ok, 7♥ is a bid too far, especially as the opponents have opened, but many are bidding 6♥ too which is still not making. In some ways I don't like the 5♥ bid - but what else do you bid? - as it takes up too much space and puts enormous pressure on partner. The ♥ suit is self supporting except if you get a weird break, and it looks like you are losing a ♣. So you are still missing 2 aces ♦+♠ between 3 hands. Also, a ♠ finesse may be necessary to get home, too, and that's not guaranteed. So statistically you have presented partner with a quandary with the hand given. With so many minor suit cards missing, maybe a 4♥ bid is preferable, followed by 5♥ if the opponents sacrifice. Again a guess, but with the opponents non-vulnerable, I believe there is more chance they will give you the opportunity of another bid. And you still may end in 6♥ - I give up :P

hi lycier, I realise GIB isn't perfect, and some of the hand descriptions are mediocre or worse, and I genuinely empathise with you when playing with or against a Robot. I admit I play with or against the Robots infrequently, but surely the best thing to do is to list and mail all these anomalies to Gibware.com, so that they can look into this. BBO uses GIB software but isn't responsible for the bids it generates. Programming a bridge computer, a friend of mine with a MSc in IT told me, is a 1000 times more difficult than programming a chess computer :(

Pass. The last thing I want is to involved in a competitive auction after partner's passed. 2♦ doesn't feel right vulnerable. There's a fair chance you will be on lead anyway, and I'd rather see how the auction pans out before entering. Given that 1♥ opener was in 3rd, let's wait for the 2♣ Drury, the 1♠ bid, the 1NT response, etc, etc, from his partner because you will still have a good chance to enter the auction with a X or 2♦if it fades quickly. I don't like passing, as 2♦ is lead directional too. But this is the sort of hand I would err on the side of caution. I'm never keen on X with a doubleton in the opponent's suit and only 3 cards in the other major. Given that you can just about scrape half-a-trick (on a good day) from ♣s too, it's not a great hand outside the ♦ suit. As jogs says: This is an ugly hand. :( Ugly hands are best not bid, in my opinion.

6♥ or 7♥ even? Mmmm.... What exactly have the opponents got? Not a lot! Assuming they have bid 4♣ on the Law of Total tricks, that means ♣s are 5-5, so the Precision opener will have a 4 card major too. I'd certainly bid 6♥ at Matchpoints, as for 7♥? Anyone's guess. (Cowardly I know) Actually I'm bidding 7♥s. Top or bottom. I can't see partner with anything less than ♠xx ♥AKJxxxxx ♦Axx ♣void, or, ♠xxx ♥AKJxxxxx ♦Ax ♣void to bid 5♥. If he does turn up with a ♣ loser it looks like I'm paying for the round in the bar after the game :)

Agree with everything here. Kaplan and Rubens hand evaluator puts this at a 12.25 count. I prefer 2♠ because if we arrive in 3NT I want my partner playing it on a potential ♣ lead.

hi Fluffy, I'd wonder what a eminent psychiatrist would make of your train of thought, and I ask that matter-of-factly not in a derogatory way? Surely, the sensible way to look at this is a match at a time, not as a conglomeration of matches. How many times have you played team matches without knowing the next team that you were going to play? Yes, I agree, planning ahead is good, and as these are the World Championships I can understand that, but predicting the future or how things turn out is something you just cannot do. Take one day at a time and enjoy. Putting pressure on before the start will make things worse, I feel.

Double - reluctantly. This could get messy (as vulnerable) opposite a passed partner, but I'd take my chance a final contract won't get doubled as North has passed already. I will nickname this type of double as a "latte double" as it is on the skinny side :)

Hi smerriman, When GIB describes a bid, I'm sure various interpretations of that bid cannot be described accurately. Ask yourself whether North can have a hand with 8 solid or semi-solid clubs for his 1NT, 3NT, then 5♣ bid? I give GIB its due as 5♣ is an advanced cue-bid, agreeing diamonds surely? Whether GIB understands cue bids is another matter! I think it is virtually impossible to gauge the distributional strength of North's hand to bid 6♦ with a Robot. A human partner, hopefully, would interpret 5♣ as "you've hit the jackpot partner, and I have extras."

Obviously Mr Keith Wells isn't familiar with the work of the NSA (in the USA) and GCHQ (in the UK). Saying in this day and age that something is secure is asking for it to be hacked. Sadly...

Let's be honest, as a Brit I have a limited view of American politics. The papers and the media are usually biased, so the only way to gauge US politicians is to watch their performances on YouTube ( which probably have been edited - so they are probably biased too :( ) Trump, in my opinion, has that egotistical, megalomaniac edge that is bordering on dictatorial and is a very scary. He's not (from what I can see) a seasoned politician, just a billionaire businessman with an agenda. I listen to his views (for the sake of completeness), as we live in a democracy and free speech is a tenet of this, but I am truly appalled by some of them. He is openly racist, in a country that is extremely multicultural and diverse, especially in the larger cities. What message is he sending to these people? All I am saying is that the Republican Party surely must have a better candidate than this, or does filthy lucre alone determine who stands for the Presidency in the USA?

Hi Fluffy, We will assume that opener has a weak 2♠ hand. I think a poignant question here is what system are your teammates playing at the other table? If they are not playing the multi, I presume the opener would have bid 2♠. Can we have overcalled a 2♠ opener with this hand? Obviously not. So that's a good reason to get involved over a multi 2♦ because we can. 2♥ is enough I feel. 4♦ is a Jumping Michael's leap in the dark bid that might be rather optimistic. As the opponents have the anchor suit ♠s they can possibly always outbid us, but we might be able to swindle a couple of part scores at each table, or a vulnerable game at one, and a sacrifice at another. It's not ideal to overcall, and like MrAce I wouldn't argue with pass either, but the shape and the vulnerability are favourable, and would I overcall a 1♠ opener with a 2♠ Michael's Cue Bid with this hand? Yes! So a 2♥ overcall isn't so bad in my opinion. Once in a while you have to throw caution to the wind.

hi Winstonm, Trump's first measure if he won the presidency would be to establish an "Expatriate Tax" to try to stop people leaving. lol! Shame the eagle didn't go for the kill :( As you probably gather, I don't like him. Period. (And I'm a Brit!)

Thanks nullve, I'm obviously not watching enough Vugraph when Norwegian players are on BBO. Will make a note for future reference. Thanks :)

Thanks johnu, Old Badger here has only seen the finished version of Blue Club (Terence Reese's book) with its 14-17 range, but it's interesting that they started big then pared down the range. Given today's modern bidding, most partnerships play a three point spread, or a four point range with a degree of flexibility given the vulnerability. Mentally upgrading and downgrading depending on the actual cards, shape, vulnerability, and bidding position. A 5 point range may work: it all depends how its structured into the main system.

Having read all the replies - interesting topic - there's an expression in bridge "Never pre-empt your partner". Whilst making life as difficult as possible for the opponents, it is imperative that your partner understands your pre-empts, and how they may vary in different positions. Whilst the given hand by spil - Opener actually held AT x JTxx KJT9xx... - perfectly illustrates this, a poor 3♣ pre-empt, in my opinion, in 1st position becomes an acceptable one in 3rd, even at adverse vulnerability. Bridge is a bidder's game, as they say nowadays, but pass is a bid too :)

hi ldrews, A good question as I used to play Precision (13-15NT) in the good old days (back in late 1970s/early 1980s) and I felt there was something missing from the system: bidding balanced hands with 12 HCPs without 4♦s. That's why Precision went through many modifications, I feel, evolved, as many systems do, but in my personal view, taking away some of the preciseness that made it easy to learn. And, yes, bidding is far more aggressive than it was 35 years ago. What worries me is the 5 point range of a 11-15NT? As Stephen Tu says: is 11-15 really an effective range? Or, more pertinently, will you and your partner be able to cope with this large range against good opposition, or even average opposition? It's alright scaring the wits of some of the seasoned, yet less experienced, members of your local club who might shudder looking at your convention card, but the real test is in the results. With the Fantunes system, with an 11-14 NT range (although some 4441 hands are opened too), 1NT is opened 28% of the time as an opening bid. So, I guess, with a more conventional balanced shape hand and a slightly expanded 11-15 NT range it's going to be your favourite opening bid, too. I. personally, have never seen a 5 HCP opening bid NT range in any recognised system - though I am sure someone will correct me on that statement. Anyway, all I can do is wish you good luck with your bridge, and hey, I loved playing Wei Precision, especially that quirky 4414 2♦ bid :)

Hello Dinarius, Who says 4th suit isn't forcing? You or your partner? Your partner? Gradually educate them into the joys of FSF :) If they refuse, find another partner. You? Then you will realise from this one hand alone - hopefully - what a valuable tool it is to have in your bidding armoury. It's standard these days to play FSF as game forcing. Once upon a time, in the long, lost past, it was only forcing for one round. It crops up time and time again, especially with Acol and SAYC, less so with 2/1 I imagine. And it does make hands like this easier to bid and evaluate.

Now that is funny, Zelandakh. "The Frivolous 3NT" Impure alliteration, and something Victor Mollo might have coined in his Menagerie series :)

[Duplicated]

Hello Dinarius, Plenty of expert players would have done what you did too :) That is: Taken a view. As you say "Eight Ever, Nine Never". But never say never. And as 1eyedjack said: Ah well, next time you will be getting a top. The only thing to add is that playing against the room, so to speak, is a good ploy if you feel that you are well behind at Pairs. I have won many a Pairs evening by swindling a few tops in the last 8 boards or so. Otherwise, steady as she goes applies, and playing with the room if you have felt your session has gone well.

When I posted this comment, 5 had chosen 'Pass' and 5 had chosen '3NT' and that about sums it up. Even I cannot quite make my mind up over this. 3NT will possibly stop the opponents from balancing, but there again it could go down heavily. If you get doubled there's always 4♣ as a cop out. Pass looks wimpy but is sensible as there's no guarantee the opponents have game or will bid game, but it makes it easier for the opponents, especially non-vulnerable, to come in. Given that pre-empts are getting flakier and flakier these days, even at adverse vulnerability, and especially in 1st position, I'm with Cyberyeti (see comment) on this one as that's a solid pre-empt, so Pass it's going to be, reluctantly.

In a way I am glad Wank has now shown the whole board, too. I admit, Delmo, I do agree to a very small degree with your logic, but looking through the traveller - and that's a fun exercise in itself - for this board, the only other minor suit games have been bid by East/West, not by East alone :) What it does illustrate perfectly - and this is instructional by itself - is that it can be a very dangerous exercise assuming partner has a certain-shaped hand (especially with limited bidding). I think most players will agree you got lucky this time, and probably made the opponents fume that you bid at the 5 level with a 4 card suit and a passed partner, and found the right result. Equally, North could have been void in ♠, and South in ♥ and both could have had a 4 card minor suit in addition. Depending on the layout you may have been looking at a -500 or a -700 penalty instead!

+200 (minimum) is always a good score at MPs, except if you have a game - and that's logical :) Partner doesn't support X you (over 2♥), bid NTs himself, or another suit, so it's quite unlikely 3NT is on. A competitive X turned into a penalty X turns into a top. Well done! (Surely bridge players are still allowed to hesitate (momentarily) at the bridge table or has 'political correctness' [:(] infected our wonderful game, too?)

Yes lycier, I, too, find it totally bizarre. I surmise, maybe GIB has a mechanism for not allowing a contract to rest in 2♠ in a competitive auction at equal vulnerability if it has a certain shape. (What else can it be?) End result: opponents end up in a doubled unbeatable game with two overtricks (as played). Yes, totally bizarre :(