iandayre

One of GIB's most bizarre common errors is refusing to defend with a huge trump stack. Here is another example. Can't something be done about this, BBO? I'm sure you can find several other examples over the past few months.

Whoever compared GIB to Walter the Walrus couldn't have been more accurate, except that GIB takes his obsession with HCP to yet another level.

I think it was two upgrades ago when GIB started making ostensibly strong advances to Leb over weak 2's with weak hands such as this, not close to strong enough even if GIB used the standard version of Leb. The last time I pointed it out, no one agreed, here is another clear example.

I would also open 1NT, both with GIB and a human partner. The H QJ makes the hand too weak for a 3C or 2NT rebid IMO. If forced to open 1C I would rebid 2C. I have to believe and agree that just about any experienced player would rebid 3NT over 3C. No guarantees. GIB, working only from specific instructions for specific situations, lacks the basic concept that the first priority for minor suit auctions is reaching 3NT. It's quite curious that GIB will bid 2NT over 2C but not 3NT over 3C. Not that it affects the bidding, but on this particular hand 3NT and 5C both make on the nose so no harm done. Correction: Sorry, ducking the first two Spades allows declarer to make 4NT.

JDonn Your accusations against me are unfounded. I do not make generalized complaints, I invariably point out specific issues with specific examples from actual hands, or at least I respond to those posted by others. Obviously I don't know all the specifics of how BBO prioritizes the improvements to GIB, but I do know that it is far from Uday's only job. I also praised him for his efforts, and I agree that snarky comments are unproductive. It is a clear consensus here that GIB does not need new conventions or treatments, it needs improvement in how existing ones are utilized. And I'll repeat again, the bid explanations (beyond the most basic auctions) are deeply flawed and need a lot of work, and I have seen very little improvement in the 16 months that I have been playing robot tournaments regularly. But, that said, thank you for making your comment. I hope we get your thoughts again. And I'll say again, if GIB didn't have potential and some strong points, I would not still be here playing and commenting.

Apparently in the last "upgrade" the definition of a 1NT bid after having made a takeout double was changed. In the past it has always (correctly) been 18-19 HCP. This now makes sensible bidding impossible and MUST be corrected immediately. We also deserve an explanation of how and why this programming error was made. Of course you are right about the bad calls of 2H and 4NT made by GIB. They are about as bad as your 4H call since 2H could have been based on 5 hearts and zero points.

I think 1H is the best opening bid with this hand, but I fully agree that if you do open 1D, 2D is as good as anything. A 1NT rebid is utterly bizarre. That said the correct contract could have been reached after 4H if S finds the obvious 5D call instead of the pointless actual choice of 4S. And call me a "whiner" if you like, but I see very little evidence that BBO is doing its best to improve GIB and to make the playing experience better for the customers. Certainly Uday, Georgi and others do their best, but I suspect that GIB takes up only a small portion of their job duties. They address some problems with the updates, and continue to ignore others. Overall the bid explanations of anything but the most basic auctions are terrible, a major overhaul is needed, but clearly BBO is unwilling to dedicate the necessary resources to the problem. So until that happens I'll be here whining incessantly. Enjoy.

Now that my busy work season is over, I'll be back playing and commenting at this forum regularly. I'm sure BBradley will be pleased LOL. http://tinyurl.com/pjacse2 I stand by my bidding here, if not my defense. Doubling with the S hand at any point is nonsense, but many did so successfully. Let's start with W. Surely a negative double instead of the 2D raise is clear cut - it can correct ♠ to ♦ at any level painlessly, and it wants ♥ in the picture. As for N couldn't a 3S call be found after I bid the suit?

Sorry, this response makes no sense. How can N be "too strong" to bid 3S yet bid 4C, which is also a minimum advance promising no strength?

Georgi's response ignores the main part of the question, and the main point of the hand. Regardless of the exact description of the double, why is N passing? Opposite any sort of strong balanced hand, N wants to play in 2C, not defend 1NT.

Hand 1 - Agree 5D would be better, but 4S isn't the worst bid ever. Hand 2 - You immediate know something is wrong when you see the explanation of 4D. GIB doesn't psych opening NT opening bids! Bid 5D and hope you make it. Yes, of course 4D was crazy. Hand 3 - Nothing wrong with GIB's second double. Only problem is your nonsense opening bid with a flat 10 HCP. Hand 4 now in a thread of its own.

My suggestion - just play bridge. Would you raise to 4H if a human partner doubled and bid? Then do so with GIB. If not, also do the same with GIB.

There is nothing wrong with your bidding. 1C, 3C, and 3C are all straight-forward, obvious choices. You are completely correct that showing the 3 card S fit should not require a maximum for your previous bids. 4NT by the bot is simply an insanely aggressive action

Georgi's reply explains a lot about why GIB's bidding has so many glaring weaknesses. He says GIB will pass "EVEN" with a singleton and minimum values. In reality of course those are exactly the holdings make pass a clear-cut choice, not an outlier. If you had a better fit and/or more strength you would raise to game.

Most certainly N should double 3C! A bug to be fixed ASAP.

The problem appears to be with the description of 2NT as apparently "balanced minimum - any shape", although we can't see the whole thing. This is misleading and clearly incorrect. Certainly you are right that passing 3H can't possibly make sense. Wouldn't 2NT have been a 3433 superaccept without the double? Should be the same with it. Not sure what you intended 2NT to be.

GIB will make a support double or redouble 100% of the time when it has the necessary 3 card support. Its pass of the double denies 3 cards, regardless of what any other explanation might say. That said it doesn't explain why GIB preferred Spades while holding 4 Hearts, or more to the point why the description of 2H does not mention 4 or more H.

But if responder had less than 8 HCP it would have passed 2D, not raised to 3D.

You certainly bid as if you thought you couldn't be doubled ;)

I would have to agree. You certainly had full values for your bidding. Getting to the small slam on 30 HCP would have been good, GIB was ridiculously piggish.

I don't know about that Lycier, most native children I have known are pretty tough and resilient. Stop picking on them! ;)

I've come to the conclusion that all the programming GIB has about when to double is based on its partner's bidding. It counts up the points pard has shown, adds its own and decides - often quite erroneously - that the opponents are too high. When GIB has trump tricks and/or extra values guaranteeing a big set, it passes, cuebids, bids a three card suit or anything other than the totally obvious double. Let's hear your response to this comment Georgi. There are more examples than I could count.

What would you like the explanation of 3S to be? Natural, exposing a psych is quite reasonable. Most balanced hands can just pass having opened 2C - at least in the real world. GIB E of course does not have that hand and should double or bid 3NT.

No doubt especially frustrating, since after the field auction of 1NT - 3NT, and the standard GIB lead of a Spade, the contract goes down a few and even -1 is a great score for you.