smerriman

You missed the bit about extending it to run over a longer period :)

[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn=smerriman&s=SAKQ62HA92DAQJCK5&wn=Robot&w=SJ3H53DT95CAQ8742&nn=Robot&n=ST97HKJ874D643C93&en=Robot&e=S854HQT6DK872CJT6&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=PP2C(Strong%20two%20club%20--%2019+%20HCP%3B%2023+%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%202N)D(6+%20HCP%3B%20rebiddable%20%21C%3B%20%21CKQ)2D(2D%20bid%20waiting%20--%2011-%20HCP%3B%2012-%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%202N)P2N(Balanced%20minimum%20--%202-5%20%21C%3B%202-5%20%21D%3B%202-5%20%21H%3B%202-5%20%21S%3B%2022-24%20HCP%3B%2023+%20total%20points)P3D!(Jacoby%20transfer%20--%205+%20%21H%3B%2011-%20HCP%3B%2012-%20total%20points)P3H(Transfer%20completed%20to%20H%20--%202-5%20%21C%3B%202-5%20%21D%3B%202-5%20%21H%3B%202-5%20%21S%3B%2022-24%20HCP%3B%2023+%20total%20points)PPP&p=DTD3D8DJHAH5H4H6H2H3HJHQCJCKCAC3CQC9C6C5D5D4DKDA&c=10]400|300[/hv] 4 points (5 by GIBs standards) vs 22-24 seems a pretty easy decision. Basic GIB, so this is the book bid, vs a simulation.

Alright - what about from opener's point of view? 3♣ may show a weak hand with clubs, but is it a sign-off? Several of the times this bidding sequence has arisen, 3nt turns out to be the right contract anyway - and of course, (in IMPs) it only needs to make just under half the time to be worth it. What sort of hands (if any) should opener correct to 3nt?

I think that's a great idea. Phil - this seems to make it easier to play when you want, not the opposite. You can drop in and out of a daylong tournament just like a challenge.

In auctions such as: 1♥ - 1nt - 2nt 1♦ - 1♥ - 1nt - 2nt it seems you'd typically want to pass to deny the invite, or bid 3nt game. Assuming "standard" SAYC or 2/1 bidding (answer may of course differ in the first auction due to the forcing 1nt), is there a logical meaning to a bid like 3♣ or 3♦? GIB seems to do this quite regularly, which doesn't necessarily say much, though I've also seen such a sequence with a human pickup partner. It doesn't seem particularly useful for this to be nonforcing, since (at IMPs at the very least) 3nt seems to always be worth the gamble even if you don't have stoppers in all suits. But if forcing, it seems you'll end up in 3nt as well without having gained anything.

Might be better if the poll allowed you to select multiple options rather than have to pick only one of the 4 play formats. Regarding IMP v BAM - over the 64 boards I played in pool play last event, about 40% ended in different contracts between the two tables. This isn't unusual; I virtually always try to make the 'correct' bid according to GIB, and am always very surprised when so many auctions turn out differently due to 'unusual' bids at the other table. In IMPs, I can ignore the bidding at the other table, and try to play the hand optimally. At BAM, if 40% of the time we're going to be in different contracts, it seems like a large proportion of hands are going to end up completely random, since going for an 80% overtrick may well be the wrong strategy. In a daylong MP tourney, the play is much more clear. Perhaps switching to BAM will change the way everyone else bids to be more 'normal'. If so, I'm fine with it. Otherwise, I don't have a clue how BAM could work.

Lycier, neither of those have anything at all to do with what I posted. Please stop cluttering threads if you have nothing useful to add.

[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn=smerriman&s=S9852HAK8DK4CA983&wn=Robot&w=ST63HJT43DA9765C2&nn=Robot&n=SAKJHQ976D83CQ764&en=Robot&e=SQ74H52DQJT2CKJT5&d=s&v=e&b=19&a=1C(Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20%21C%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)P1H(One%20over%20one%20--%204+%20%21H%3B%206+%20total%20points)P1S(3+%20%21C%3B%203-%20%21H%3B%204+%20%21S%3B%2011+%20HCP%3B%2012-18%20total%20points)P2D!(Fourth%20suit%20forcing%20--%204+%20%21H%3B%2013+%20total%20points)P2H(3+%20%21C%3B%203%20%21H%3B%204+%20%21S%3B%2011-14%20HCP%3B%2012+%20total%20points)P2S(4+%20%21H%3B%204+%20%21S%3B%2013+%20total%20points)P2N(3+%20%21C%3B%203%20%21H%3B%204-5%20%21S%3B%2011-14%20HCP%3B%2012+%20total%20points)P3C(Cue%20bid%20--%204+%20%21H%3B%204+%20%21S%3B%20%21CA%3B%2018+%20total%20points)P3H(Cue%20bid%20--%203+%20%21C%3B%201+%20%21D%3B%203%20%21H%3B%204-5%20%21S%3B%2011-14%20HCP%3B%20no%20%21DA%3B%20%21HA%3B%2012+%20total%20points)PPP&p=DQDKDAD3C2C4CTCAS2S3SJSQH5H8HTHQH6H2HKH4HAH3H7C5S5S6SKS7SAS4S8STD8DTD4D9DJC3D5C6D2C8D7H9CQCKC9D6CJS9HJC7]400|300[/hv] Having shown 4 spades, GIB proceeds to cuebid 3♣, showing the club Ace and 18+ total points, then passes a cue bid in hearts. Second time in a row something like this happens in the last round of a survivor tournament :(

GIB showing 6+ spades after a takeout double when it only has 4 is something I've seen before too. jdonn replied that he thought it's being worked on (whatever that means).

.. which declarer was almost certainly going to win anyway; the chances it actually gives away a trick are far lower than chances when leading any other suit. GIB doesn't (always) lead long suits like humans - all calculations are based on double dummy analysis, so assumes declarer will 'figure out' who has what and the best line to take, like experts often can via other means. Computer analysis has shown leading from suits like its clubs are superior (https://www.amazon.com/Winning-Notrump-Leads-David-Bird/dp/1554947596)

Perhaps the fact it has been suggested so many times over so many years means it's more important to fix.

The system should just default to claiming all tricks regardless of whether you are on lead or not. No idea why it doesn't. I'm sure this has been requested a lot in the past too, seems like it'd be a trivial fix.

That was what I was thinking. With two passed hands, I can't think of any hand GIB would compete with; while if you open 1♠, the auction may well be at 4♥ before you get another turn to bid. So some of the suggestions above about interference don't seem to make sense (or missed the fact that this was an Instant Tournament - they make sense for human opponents). There is a risk that GIB will overbid, but not a huge one - you normally get chances to take control of the auction.

Instant Tournament = playing with GIB. It doesn't even have a description, so is probably undefined - looks like GIB passes regardless of what it holds.

Wouldn't have that meaning in an Instant Tournament. I would open 2♣, myself.

Re 3 - while some play Better Minor, in Standard American the normal bid is always to open 1D with 4-4 in the minors (primarily due to the reverse issue), so this doesn't seem like a great example.

Does GIB assume everyone is in the same contract in MP? That would explain it.

[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn=smerriman&s=S82HKQDAK762CAK43&wn=Robot&w=SAK764HJ7543D94C6&nn=Robot&n=SQ9HA862DQT5CQJT2&en=Robot&e=SJT53HT9DJ83C9875&d=w&v=o&b=8&a=PPP1D(Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20%21D%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)2D!(Michaels%20--%203-%20%21C%3B%203-%20%21D%3B%205+%20%21H%3B%205+%20%21S%3B%2011-%20HCP%3B%209-12%20total%20points%3B%20forcing)D(Penalty%20double%20--%2010-11%20HCP%3B%2012-%20total%20points)2S(2+%20%21S%3B%2011-%20HCP%3B%2012-%20total%20points)3S(3+%20%21D%3B%2014-21%20HCP%3B%2015-22%20total%20points%3B%20forcing)PPP&p=H4H2HTHQHKH5H6H9CAC6C2C9D2D4DQD3H8STC3HJS5S2SKS9SASQS3S8H7HASJD6C8CKS6CTS7D5C7D7D9DTD8DKC4S4CJC5H3CQDJDA]400|300[/hv] I wasn't entirely sure what GIBs double of 2♦ showed. 3♥ and 3♠ were both described identically - 3+ diamonds, forcing (I think oddly 3♥ may have promised one more point than 3♠). I decided to bid 3♠ hoping GIB would bid 3nt with a stopper in spades. I certainly wasn't expecting a pass. Not nice in day 5 of a survivor tournament :(

Like I said - it will stop East from leading clubs, but I can't see how that gives me a better chance of gaining a trick vs the immediate trick. Seems it will just make it more likely opponents will knock out the hearts.

[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn=Robot&s=SKQJ652HDAKQ86CJ9&wn=Robot&w=ST843HKQ4D4C86542&nn=smerriman&n=S97HAJT962DT732CK&en=Robot&e=SAH8753DJ95CAQT73&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=2C(Strong%20two%20club%20--%2019+%20HCP%3B%2023+%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%202N)P2D(2D%20bid%20waiting%20--%20forcing%20to%202N)P2S(Opener%27s%20suit%20--%205+%20%21S%3B%2019+%20HCP%3B%2023+%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203S)P3H(4+%20%21H%3B%205+%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203N)P4D(4+%20%21D%3B%205+%20%21S%3B%2019+%20HCP%3B%2023+%20total%20points)P4N(Blackwood%20%5BD%5D%20--%204+%20%21D%3B%204+%20%21H%3B%209+%20total%20points)P5N(Even%20number%20of%20keycards%20and%20some%20void%20--%204+%20%21D%3B%205+%20%21S%3B%2019+%20HCP%3B%2023+%20total%20points)P6D(4+%20%21D%3B%204+%20%21H%3B%209+%20total%20points)PPP&p=SAS2S3S7C3C9C6CKD2D5DKD4&c=12]400|300[/hv] It's one thing for GIB to not cash an ace to defeat a slam. But what could possibly cause GIB to *underlead* said Ace? NB - I was South, and 2♣ may have put GIB off a little on the lead, but this is trick 2, and my hand is dummy. Edit - this was MP, so I guess it was trying to defeat the contract by 2 tricks. But is it worth the risk? In hindsight maybe it actually is. I'm too used to playing IMPs. Ignore me.

Excellent point, thank you. I hadn't considered that fact there might have been a valid reason for GIB to duck. Interesting indeed. Probably far too daring for me :) The J may be a small chance of winning, but it's a chance of a bonus trick nonetheless - is there anything to gain from not playing it? It will stop East from leading clubs, but I'm not sure that helps me much due to the heart situation.

[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn=smerriman&s=SK842HK4DK542CAK3&nn=Robot&n=SJ97HA8DJT976CJ82&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=PP1N(notrump%20opener.%20Could%20have%205M.%20--%202-5%20!C%3B%202-5%20!D%3B%202-5%20!H%3B%202-5%20!S%3B%2015-17%20HCP%3B%2018-%20total%20points)PPP]320|240[/hv] GIB Survivor Tournament (MPs). Lead is 5♣, and East plays the Q over dummy's J. What is the best play from here?

Just played a hand and remembered this thread - this isn't 11HCP, but it seems GIB can still have a reasonable hand - according to its system, this has 7 HCP and 10 total points: [hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=pn%7Csmerriman%2CRobot%2CRobot%2CRobot%7Cst%7C%7Cmd%7C3SAJT6432HAKDCAK54%2CSQ9875HQ74DAQJ82C%2CSHJ82DKT63CQJT762%2CSKHT9653D9754C983%7Csv%7CN%7Cah%7CBoard%205%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C2C%7Can%7CStrong%20two%20club%20--%2019%2B%20HCP%3B%2023%2B%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%202N%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C2D%7Can%7C2D%20bid%20waiting%20--%2011-%20HCP%3B%2012-%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%202N%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C2S%7Can%7COpener%20s%20suit%20--%205%2B%20%21S%3B%2019%2B%20HCP%3B%2023%2B%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203S%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C3C%21%7Can%7CCheaper%20minor%20--%2011-%20HCP%3B%2012-%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203S%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C4C%7Can%7C4%2B%20%21C%3B%205%2B%20%21S%3B%2019%2B%20HCP%3B%2023%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C6C%7Can%7C4%2B%20%21C%3B%2011-%20HCP%3B%209-12%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cpc%7CS7%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cmc%7C12%7C]400|300[/hv] For once I think it actually did quite well here, though!

Here's the traveller if you want to see the wide range of bidding that went on.. http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/daylong_hands.php?tourney=ARDARD%3Ad011f901.bf67.11e6.b596.0cc47a39aeb4-1481436327-&username=m1cha&board=INSTANCE-T249948-R1-B2-I28 (Incidentally, the difference between 5♣= and 4♠x= was 20.67 IMP - nice estimate :))

4♦ is obviously bad. It seems in many competitive situations, it defines bids similarly to as if opponents hadn't competed at all. The upper range of 3♣ looks like the first problem though - wouldn't any strong hand pass 2♥?