smerriman

This happens once in a while to me too and has happened in the dailies as well as challenges. Logging off and on doesn't help, and while it's happening, attempting to play a different challenge usually fails too. Normally it's just a case of waiting it out, though in the most recent case, it actually completely broke the bidding.

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:16aaea7b.023a.11e7.ab15.0cc47a39aeb4-1488783416&u=smerriman smerriman - elyk25 40* - 8 Note the score says 52-8, but I'm zeroing out board 5 due to a BBO glitch. [hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=pn%7Csmerriman%2CRobot%2CRobot%2CRobot%7Cst%7C%7Cmd%7C3SAK52HQ95DQ5CAJ85%2CSJT3HAJ73DKJ76C32%2CS8764HK842D32CKQ4%2CSQ9HT6DAT984CT976%7Csv%7CN%7Cah%7CBoard%205%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C4N%7Can%7CQuantitative%20invite%20to%206NT%20--%202-5%20%21C%3B%202-5%20%21D%3B%202-4%20%21H%3B%202-4%20%21S%3B%2016-17%20HCP%7Cmb%7CD%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CS9%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cpc%7CDT%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CST%7Cpc%7CS7%7Cpc%7CSQ%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CSJ%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CH9%7Cpc%7CHJ%7C]400|300[/hv] After playing the first four boards, it kept kicking me out saying error / table closing (happens once in a rare while when playing a challenge). Eventually the hand loaded, and showed my p opened 1NT. I raised to 4NT quantitative, then got kicked out again. Upon reloading, p had actually passed (8 points) and my 4NT bid was somehow attributed to the opponent! Obviously, GIB would never open 4NT "quantitative", and 4NTx isn't a fair contract.

Here were the four hands: [hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn=smerriman&s=SAKQJT92HA4DQ3CKT&wn=Robot&w=SH932DT9654CA7642&nn=Robot&n=S8HQJT8765D872CJ9&en=Robot&e=S76543HKDAKJCQ853&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=PP1S(Major%20suit%20opening%20--%205+%20!S%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)]400|300[/hv] This was with advanced robots for the forum challenge event. I went with the conservative pass. In retrospect, I was thinking 3nt was probably a better bid, and that's what happened at the other table. It does go down 2 on a diamond lead (more if you misguess clubs) - whether or not GIB would find this lead is moot, since North decided to raise 3NT to 6♥ (!) and give me a large swing.

Yep, mixed up the threads and didn't get my edit in fast enough :)

Yes, that's correct.

[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn=smerriman&s=SAKQJT92HA4DQ3CKT&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=PP1S(Major%20suit%20opening%20--%205+%20!S%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)]200|300[/hv] Playing with three robots. Your bid. (Would you bid differently with a human?)

I recommended a couple of times earlier restricting to people with >= x forum posts - might be worth considering.

And I'll play in this too.

Congrats Phil!

You know I'm in :)

I think AyunuS was replying to johnu, who clearly wasn't ;) For reference, putting it into a practice bidding table, GIB would bid 4♥ rather than 3nt.

If I recall correctly, in a Michael's sequence, 1♦ (2♦) x is described as "Penalty double, 10+ HCP". I'm never quite what it means, though. Overall, I agree, this and many many other doubles should be penalty when GIB thinks they're takeout. I'm not sure what the exact rule should be, but there should be a very limited number of sequences where a double of a game bid or higher is takeout.

Every other time GIB makes a strange play it always seems to be based on making too many "certain" assumptions based on human bidding. But this is just bizarre, since you have exactly the hand you promised. That's crazy. (Also bad that North bid 4NT to begin with..)

If you search the forum for 'bar bid', you'll find several complaints from 2015 and earlier about the fact GIB would make this bid with just 5 clubs and that it needed to be changed to 6. In June 2015, GIB was updated accordingly: The following hand just popped up in a challenge: [hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn=Robot&s=SA82HAK763DK42CT3&wn=Robot&w=SK65HT4DJT975CAK7&nn=smerriman&n=SQJ94HQD863C98642&en=Robot&e=ST73HJ9852DAQCQJ5&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=P1H(Major%20suit%20opening%20--%205+%20%21H%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)P1S(One%20over%20one%20--%204+%20%21S%3B%206+%20total%20points)P1N(2-3%20%21C%3B%202-3%20%21D%3B%205%20%21H%3B%202-3%20%21S%3B%2012-14%20HCP)P3C(Bar%20bid%3B%20long%201%20--%206+%20%21C%3B%204+%20%21S%3B%206%20total%20points)PPP&p=DAD2D5D3S7SAS5S4H3HTHQH2D6DQDKD7HAH4D8H5HKC7S9HJDJC2C5D4H9H6D9C4SJS3S2SKS6SQSTS8C6CQCTCADTC8CJH7H8C3CKC9]400|300[/hv]

I believe the issue isn't the amount of admin work, but the fact that the faster players have to wait weeks to play again, when they could have finished entire extra tournaments in the same amount of time.

It does, and leads to the same result. There isn't symmetry here, since you know East has 3 or 1, while South has 2 or 4.

My non-expert thoughts which could well be wrong: Disagree for the reason that you know East has 13 cards. There are more hands where East has 543 (21C10 = 352716) vs 3 (21C12 = 293930). Of course, you know that South has a 1NT opener, so not all of those cases apply, but that probably puts things slightly more in favour of East being balanced too. Disagree; that relies on the same flawed assumption as above that singleton and tripleton are equally likely to begin with. Agree for the similar 13-card reasons as described above. Disagree with the reasoning because while South *could* play others from K542, I believe he'd play the 2 100% of the time, thus restricted choice doesn't affect the probabilities for this case. Disagree that South's play is irrelevant; agree that if East had played the 2, 3 cards are more likely (but because 3 cards are more likely regardless); disagree with the implied idea of this case having anything to do with what happens when East plays the 3.

smerriman 8.5 - Elyk25 7.5 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:2f04c780.e7eb.11e6.ab15.0cc47a39aeb4-1485890797&u=smerriman which locks us at 32-32 :D 8 board playoff to come.

This isn't true - each challenge is only 16 boards at a time and the next challenge can't start until the previous is complete. So you need to play 16 boards within 3 days. If this is a problem, you're going to struggle to complete 64 boards in a week. (Conversely, if you don't follow each other, due to timezones there could be up to a 24 hour delay between matches even if both people are online regularly).

Important Reminder to all - if you 'follow' each other, challenges will be auto-accepted allowing you to play your own boards as soon as the challenge is issued. If you do this before completing the first challenge, all future challenges can be started immediately rather than having to wait for each later one to be accepted. This will speed things up immensely.

Will be finishing the group stage then regardless, adjusting any remaining scores as fairly as possible.

Never even thought of the possibility of bidding on after the double. I guess that makes sense.

[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn=Robot&s=SAJT42HQJ5DCAKJ82&wn=Robot&w=SKQ853H6DQ73CQ953&nn=smerriman&n=S76HKT743DAKJ84CT&en=Robot&e=S9HA982DT9652C764&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=P1H(Major%20suit%20opening%20--%205+%20%21H%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)P1S(One%20over%20one%20--%204+%20%21S%3B%206+%20total%20points)P2D(Opener%20two%20rebid%20--%203-%20%21C%3B%204+%20%21D%3B%205+%20%21H%3B%203-%20%21S%3B%2011-16%20HCP%3B%2012-18%20total%20points)P3C!(Fourth%20suit%20forcing%20--%204+%20%21S%3B%2013+%20total%20points)P3D(3-%20%21C%3B%205+%20%21D%3B%205+%20%21H%3B%202-%20%21S%3B%2011-16%20HCP%3B%2012-18%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203N)P3H(3+%20%21H%3B%204+%20%21S%3B%2016+%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203N)P4D(Cue%20bid%20--%201-3%20%21C%3B%205+%20%21D%3B%205+%20%21H%3B%201-2%20%21S%3B%2016-%20HCP%3B%20no%20%21CA%3B%20%21DA%3B%20no%20%21SA%3B%2014-18%20total%20points)P4N(Blackwood%20%5BH%5D%20--%203+%20%21H%3B%204+%20%21S%3B%2018+%20total%20points)P5H(Two%20or%20five%20key%20cards%3B%20no%20queen%20--%201-3%20%21C%3B%205+%20%21D%3B%205+%20%21H%3B%201-2%20%21S%3B%2016-%20HCP%3B%20no%20%21CA%3B%20%21DA%3B%20no%20%21SA%3B%2014-18%20total%20points)P5N(Query%20kings.%20Have%20all%20keycards.%20Does%20not%20promise%20extras%20--%203+%20%21H%3B%204+%20%21S%3B%20%21HQ%3B%2018+%20total%20points)P6D(King%20of%20D%20--%201-3%20%21C%3B%205+%20%21D%3B%205+%20%21H%3B%201-2%20%21S%3B%2016-%20HCP%3B%20no%20%21CA%3B%20%21DA%3B%20no%20%21SA%3B%2014-18%20total%20points)P7H(Signoff%20--%203+%20%21H%3B%204+%20%21S%3B%20%21HQ%3B%2018+%20total%20points)PPP&p=DTS2D3DJH3H2HJH6HQSKH4H9CAC5CTC7CKC3S6C6SAS5S7S9H5S3HTH8DAD6C2D7DKD2S4DQD8D9STC9C4C8CQH7D4D5CJS8HASJSQHK]400|300[/hv] I (South, not North) miscount aces and bid a grand slam. Basic GIB apparently doesn't think the Ace of trumps is enough to double with. It must have really believed my 5NT bid :)

The idea was that you'd still need to sign up via the forum to be able to access the tournament (as opposed to a free for all like the Survivor/real daylong tournaments), thus keeping the personal forum touch, and basically keeping cheating out of play. You'd want to limit forum signups to people actually active on the forum (a few of the non-responders in the current event had 0 posts, for example) - this should really be the case for the challenge events regardless. If someone has multiple active forum accounts with multiple posts under each and really wants to cheat in a friendly forum tournament.. Yes, that's the only real problem. It would be nice if the scores could update in real time somehow, but that may be beyond BBO's capability at the moment.