iandayre

You may defend your XX and subsequent double, but they are certainly aggressive actions. You just can't bid that way with GIB. Pass and take your good score if it's coming, no need for greed. That said of course 2S on a 3 card suit is terrible. Has Georgi or anyone else EVER addressed this issue? It's certainly been discussed here enough.

Wow. That is truly bizarre. Frightening actually. If GIB were Mr. Data from Star Trek TNG, he would be shut down and disassembled. Maybe not such a bad idea...

I don't see why 3S should be forcing, it should be invitational as it would be without the interference. The actual hand can just bid 4S but with a weaker suit but same overall strength a cuebid followed by 3S forcing, if possible, would make sense. We DO NOT want it doubling with this hand, partner will pass much too often.

No, there is no great bid with this hand for GIB or anyone (including myself) who plays new suit advances after partner's overcall as constructive but NF. At MP I would probably bid 1S with GIB, but 2S with a human partner. GIB would be too likely to raise 2S with a singleton. But at IMPS I'd have to try 2S with GIB also and hope for the best.

It's not worth any voluntary bids. It should be waiting for LHO to act over the double of 2H. And carrying on to 4H is crazy.

The main reason why I would prefer to keep it as is, with human best hand, is that it is impossible to defend intelligently with the bots since they don't signal. The last thing I want is to have to defend with them much more often than I do now.

Agreed. Double isn't great but marginally acceptable. A free 3H bid is plenty with the E hand.

GIB will not escape without at least a 5 card suit to run to. And neither would I.

Now this one we have all seen before. Can't GIB have some criteria for high level doubles other than high card point count?

I haven't seen this particular blunder before. Let's get it fixed please BBO.

Now that it is my busy work season, I am playing more in the 8 board instant tournaments, since I can finish one on my lunch break. And to be fair, there are about as many examples where the current GIB's actions are more effective than in the past, than where they are less. Perhaps the trend is even a net positive. But here is a hand where GIB is now taking a silly action it avoided before. http://tinyurl.com/o7cd8g6 The auction proceeded various ways at other tables. One bid it exactly as I did - I would never bid this way against humans, but I thought it likely that GIB would allow me to play 4S undoubled with 4H making. And even if I were doubled, -2 for a good save was quite possible. But at no table under the previous version(s) of GIB did N feel the need to bid 5D!!! So tell me Georgi, what attempt at an UPgrade caused GIB to make this blunder? Note - the hand I copied (inadvertently) was the hand that was bid the same way mine was through 4S.

4H should deny any A or K in the hand. 3H is the generic raise, forcing. Note I said "should" I will be interested to see what GIB actually held.

True enough, GIB should be consistent. As I said in the OP, every other time I have used a SJS with the suit + fit hand, I was able to show the shortness, described correctly. This may have been the first time an opponent interfered. Of course since I play in the human best hand tournaments, GIB virtually never has a hand good enough to make one itself, and if it did I would also have a big hand.

Nothing terrible about that Steve but I have found it more effective to reserve your auction for 2542 shape and show the shortness when held.

A simple question at MP - win the first trick, hoping to cash 13 off the top? Or duck to rectify the count for a squeeze? I realized I don't want all 4 hands seen, and I don't know how to show only two. So... N Hand - 94, A4, K83, AKQ762 S Hand - A762, KQ93, AQJT, 4. Opening lead S8, 9, T ... Auction was 1C-1H, 3C-6NT

Certainly that explanation is incorrect. Mind you it would not have occurred to me to take any action other than Pass. You can't make game opposite that super-max partner held, what would you expect after an average balancing overcall?

BB no offense, I am sure your suggestions are as accurate as they are unintelligible. To copy a hand, click on Options underneath the hand diagram after you have played it. Then click on Export Deal, then Handviewer link. A tinyurl link will appear, copy it and paste it to your BB Post, and there you are.

I'd modify your statement a bit. You can take inference when GIB does cue bid. It has extras and it's almost always safe to go for slam - assuming you haven't overbid up to that point. It's the negative inferences from failure to cue bid that can't be taken safely.

The problem I believe is that GIB is evaluating its hand as a minimum 2C opener, despite the playing strength. A 4D cue is certainly correct, followed of course by S showing the HA. Now N can bid 5C hoping for a cue of the DK. Or just jump to 6S if that is too much to ask. Gee, another time a 4D cue is right to show the A, below game.

Given that N was a passed hand, a cuebid by S after the double is about 1000% clear cut. This hand is a perfect example. Why should S guess what N's longer major is? And given passed hand status, what is the down side of the cuebid? The other issue, once again given N's passed hand status, why is GIB S jumping with 9 count with no long suit? Game is very remote, partner should not be punished for re-entering the auction with a double.

Utter nonsense. 4D shows the Ace of Diamonds, period. If partner moves to slam without a Spade control and we lose 2 quick tricks there, it's his error. If I don't cue diamonds and partner has 2 quick losers there, how can he move to slam when it's correct?

I need to save my post about GIB bid descriptions and just post it every time when it's appropriate. Because it is very frequently appropriate. The idea that your 5H call is anything but natural is silly, and clearly N should pass. But here we are, the BBO people who deal with GIB barely have time to visit this forum and respond to our issues occasionally, they obviously do not have the extensive time it would require to go through the database and bring the bid descriptions up to par. That is on BBO management.

Well certainly we should all be able to agree that with 3 of the suit partner bids, GIB should never correct to a 4 card suit. And your description should reflect that.

It's neither correct for GIB to always pass 3NT or always correct to 4 of the major in these situations. Probably it should most often pass but with an invite based more on distribution than high cards, it, like a good human player, should be able to make an intelligent decision.

I agree with both who questioned GIB's 3NT rebid. Too bad Georgi didn't address that part of it.