m1cha

I'll try again.

Hi! By the way, is this also true for the challenges? That is, if I interrupted a challenge for any reason, perhaps even left BBO, could I resume it later? (Within the valid period, of course.)

Yes. At TPs, if you have a slam and some full games, you will get a good score no matter how you play. If you have part-score hands only, even a very good player cannot get such a good score. If you have a very bad set of hands, you may end up with a negative score and there is nothing you can do about it. At MPs, average play ends up near 50 % no matter what the cards are. If you play well / badly, you will end up at > 60 % / < 40 % no matter what the cards are - or almost no matter. IMPs are in between. Average play ends up at 0 score no matter what the cards are. If you play well / badly, you will end up at a positive / negative score. But with "bad" hands you will not score strongly; whereas with "good" hands successful players can reach a high positive score while unsuccessful players can reach a high negative score. For my part, I stopped playing TPs. I am surprised to see that more people play TPs than MPs or IMPs but I guess it's just because they are on top of the list. It would be interesting to see what happens if the list were reversed and IMPs on top. I predict in the long run most people would be playing IMPs. You can add up TPs or IMPs or average MPs over 3 consecutive days ending up in something like a 24 board tournament. You can even add up / average over 125 days ending up in a 1000 board tournament :) . Okay, players would be varying and you cannot "win" this, but is it really important? I have never won any of the BBO Dailys anyway.

2. I'm for "best hand". I feel in the last event we had too many boards where the robots were playing and the humans only discarding, these boards just increase randomness. I remember two challenges of 12 boards where I played 4 boards as declarer, one of them a full game. The other boards were played by the robots, same on both tables, resulting in matches with very low total scores. 1. I slightly prefer MP (BAM), partly as a matter of change and of curiosity. In addition I feel that MPs emphasize the playing skills (all overtricks matter) while IMPs emphasize the bidding skills (reaching game and slam matters, also competitive auctions). The latter can be a good thing in human-only competitions but here all players have the same bidding system, 3/4 of the bidding is done by robots, and penalizing sacrifice bids is just a matter of luck (see here if you don't know what I mean: http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/75252-robot-partner-running-from-a-penalty-double/). I think at MPs we get a better measure of the players' bridge skills.

Consolation: I lost to mkgnao 6 - 15 (-9 IMPs). http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:0ca911a3.90d6.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1476315969&u=m1cha

Consolation: I just lost to antonylee by 1 IMP 13 - 14. http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:9bd6170e.9034.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1476246630&u=m1cha

Consolation: m1cha won against barmar 27-15 (+12 IMPs). http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:efa2c5a1.8f13.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1476122646&u=m1cha

Not really. Maybe the idea is: It is better THEY play 4♥ going down 8 non-vulnerable and undoubled (!) than let US play 4♥ and we make it. ;) Ok, serious now. It is not as rediculous as it seems at first glance because East with its bid of 3♥ promised "rebiddable ♥" which is a good 5-card suit. East lied about the ♥ length, and so did West. This is why they end up in a 4-2 fit. East also promised 18 - 22 total points. West has 6 total points, namely ♦A and two doubletons in partner's two long suits (including the trump suit). 22 + 6 = 28, so it's only logical to raise to game. (Ooops, I did it again.) I believe it is part of a strategy. The following happens to me quite often: Robot partner opens 1m, I bid 1M, robot raises to 2M. I systematically raise to 4M because it's "best hand" and we always should have game. Then I find out partner raised me with a 3-card suit, and I go down 1 or even 2 playing in a Moysian while 3NT would have been cold. I am not sure now if that only happens when opponents bid (and opener fails to bid 1NT perhaps because of a missing stop) or if it also occurs in undisturbed bidding. But it's part of the system. The "GIB System Notes" read "Raising responder's suit usually promises 4 cards, but will occasionally raise with only 3". I doubt "occasionally". Anyway, I find it difficult to imagine why this is how it's done. Because if I am interested in opener's 3-card support I have means to find it. But this is a different topic.

Thanks for your answer, jdonn. I was afraid it would be. Bidding in bridge isn't easy, but doubles are twice as difficult. :)

Thanks, lycier. Yes, and that is part of my point because a double of 3♥ did have a definition as a penalty double. "2+♥", iirc. I see, good to know. Though I wouldn't always call that "help to escape". ;) Yes.

Yesterday in the "Free Daylong tournament (MP) - 2016-10-05", Board 1. Here is the link: http://tinyurl.com/jk9lnq5 I thought of doubling 3♥ already, checked the label and found out a double was indeed a penalty double. But then I wasn't sure if I could beat the contract and I thought I could drive opps a stage higher and double them there. Things went as expected - until partner ran from my double of 4♥. To be fair, my double of 4♥ did not promise a particular number of cards in ♥, iirc. But if a double of 3 is a penalty double, shouldn't a double of 4 be a penalty double, too? And even if my double had been a take-out double I believe partner should have passed this holding KT97 in opponents' suit. 15 of 96 players here went down 2 for -300 instead of bringing opponents down 5 for +1100.

You may want to try this booklet. It has all you need. http://www.martybergen.com/booklets.html#Number_38

I'd also bid 3♠ with your hand and 3NT with the other one. I just want to add that bidding 3NT doesn't give up the ♠ contract because partner can pull to 4♠ with a suitable hand, so there is no need to raise 3♠ with a doubleton.

So 2C-2D-3D is non-forcing? I also play that with two partners. The thing is, as Marty Bergen points out, that 2♣-2♦-3♦ consumes a lot of bidding space, so we try to avoid this sequence and prefer to bid 2♣-2♦-2NT or to open on the one level. Then 2♣-2♦-3♦ is more or less reserved for single-suited hands that don't want to be played in NT. And now, if partner has a 0 - 3 point hand, why bid 4♣ or 3NT as second negative forcing opener to bid 4♦ which will then be passed although partner had no chance yet to show his distribution? So we decided, second negative to 2♣-2♦-3m is PASS, and any bid promises 4+ points. Of course that means if opener has an 11+ trick single-suiter in a minor, he has to jump to 4m after the 2♦ response. So far this has not happened. By the way we also play "longer minor" as second negative over 2♣-2♦-2M. That is, with 0 - 3 points and without a fit we bid 3♣ or 3♦ whichever suit is longer. Since it denies a fit, it should be at least a 4-card minor suit and opener may pass this. It can sometimes play better than 3M or 3NT.

I agree. I just wonder, it may be the smallest lie. If you have a fit (and it looks like you have at least a fit in ♣) your 6 loser hand can be very strong. (And I'm saying this although I don't like shortages in partner's first suit.) If you don't have a fit, you may still be fine because the 2♣ rebid can be very wide-range. Of course, if opener has a 10-HCP hand with 2164, you're running into trouble. Then perhaps 3♣. The advantage is, if partner faked the 2♣ bid, you have enough for game, so opener can continue with 3♥, 3♦ or 3♠. Unless these are now cue bids, that is.

How about 2♠? Too strong perhaps but how likely is it to go wrong? Sure opener would show 3-card support of ♥ after that?

I'd like to play.

I lost to olegru 20 : 53 (-33 IMPs). http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:3b5bd640.84c3.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1474988473&u=m1cha

So true. Sorry, I guess I was too tired last night.

Be sure to ruff with the ♣K! This comes at no cost but it rescues your contract if opener has a ♠ doubleton!

Hi, nice problem. For a little while I wondered if playing NT could be a good idea until I figured out that partner is unlikely to have many diamonds ... :)

Now I've played them, too. You won 23:20. http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:528b246f.8280.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1474739833&u=m1cha

I just lost against diana_eva 4:44 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:f4e070dc.825b.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1474724214&u=m1cha

I got three challenges from jexa_, you and barmer within a few hours. I accepted all, completed against jexa_ last night, plan to play your challenge tonight and against barmer maybe also tonight or tomorrow night. Hope that's ok with all of you. jexa_ won against me 47:28. http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:316cbcda.8235.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1474707565&u=m1cha

I'd like to join, too.