smerriman

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:8935654a.82d4.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1474776002&u=smerriman smerriman 41 - elwood913 27 A game of crazy swings.. with the biggest when I defeated 1Hx by 4 tricks, and GIB took elwood913 into 7S missing an ace, resulting in 15 IMPs. And that's me done! Now I wait..

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:911b7a08.82d4.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1474776016&u=smerriman smerriman 1 - stoppiello 18

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:92755ce2.821f.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1474698279&u=smerriman smerriman 24 - manudude03 10 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:8e271dbc.821f.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1474698272&u=smerriman smerriman 23 - hrothgar 6 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:8642ba22.821f.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1474698258&u=smerriman smerriman 10 - dadim 21

Matchups appear to be in the second post of this thread for those who didn't realise. PS - frank0 - try using code tags for the tables to make them line up properly without needing dots etc.

Partner has rebid 1nt, showing 12-14, not 15-17.

I have to know.. was this thread's title a clever play on words, or was that accidental?

How will the round robin be conducted? Given the way challenges work, you don't necessarily need to wait for each round to complete before playing the next - you could issue challenges to multiple opponents (I believe you're allowed up to 10 friend challenges at once?) and play them as soon as they're accepted. This would be far faster / ideal, but would muddy the waters in terms of what it means to fail to finish a match.

I think the number of boards should always be a multiple of 16. Virtually all of the 'time' involved in a match is between issuing the challenge / accepting the challenge / waiting for the other person to complete the challenge, not the amount of time to complete the set of boards itself. Since BBO lets you play up to 16 boards at a time, 12 boards will take the same amount of time as 16, and 24 will take the same amount of time as 32, for example. The more boards the more accurate the result, so it should always be rounded up to a multiple of 16.

That's where the problem is. With an actual field, that makes perfect sense and MP is far better. But here there is no "field" - you're competing one vs one. With GIB's bidding and play, even if you end up in the same contract, you're very likely to differ by a trick here and there regardless of what you did, making the results of each board quite random. In MP, these tricks are highly important in every decision in every hand. In IMPs, they don't make as much of an impact. (That's why I prefer MP for the daylong GIB tournaments, but IMP for challenges).

Count me in again.

I think (as did several earlier in this thread) in this type of challenge event this actually increases the luck factor considerably, not the skill factor.

Without answering your actual question, according to the system notes, GIB is aware of restricted choice and will randomise its play from an equal doubleton, but will play lowest from equals in other cases.

[hv=sn=smerriman&s=SKQT432HJ2DA94CA4&wn=Robot&w=SHT76543DQ32CQT76&nn=Robot&n=SA98HAK98DT85C953&en=Robot&e=SJ765HQDKJ76CKJ82&d=w&v=o&b=8&a=PPP1S(Major%20suit%20opening%20--%205+%20%21S%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)P2C!(Drury%20--%203+%20%21S%3B%2011-%20HCP%3B%2010-12%20total%20points)P3N(6%20%21S%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%3B%20partial%20stop%20in%20%21C%3B%20partial%20stop%20in%20%21D%3B%20partial%20stop%20in%20%21H)PPP]400|300[/hv] The GIB System Notes page says: This appears to be incorrect. Incidentally, 3NT is a better contract. But this is basic GIB, so no simulations were involved. Just the notes wrong, I suspect.

a) http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:1842b204.7b70.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1473963205 The URL for 6DE= in board 1 is broken due to the apostrophe in "Opener's suit" not being correctly encoded (so the rest of the URL gets cut off). b) http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:b5d0522b.7951.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1473730253&u=zebutin The URL for 6SN= in board 13 is broken due to the ampersand not being correctly encoded. This time, the whole link gets carried across, but still breaks the result unless you replace & by %26 in the resulting URL. This doesn't just affect the results pages, but also the tinyurl links generated by 'export hand' within the playing interface itself. Apostrophes don't break as badly - they appear to be simply stripped: http://tinyurl.com/z3rfktr (click on the 2S bid) I don't have an example, but there was definitely a case in the past where the tinyurl link was fully broken like in the second case - probably for the same reason (the ampersand in a Queen & King response).

GIB plays it as 4SF.

That makes the semifinal matchups: nullve vs diana_eva dadim vs zebutin I'm thinking 48 boards again for the semifinals, with 64 for the final - but people can play more here if they're willing. Good luck!

Are you sure it was North making the second claim? Often after a rejected claim, one of the defenders will make a counter-claim/concession (sometimes for the same number of tricks, if they think their partner was mistaken in rejecting the claim), which the declarer will accept and requires no input from the other defender. Of course, in this case, it was a mistake, but that's the only way a claim can be accepted without you being involved.

Stephen Tu is talking about Gib, not you. Gib defends based on double dummy simulations; all simulations prove you can make all remaining tricks regardless of the card Gib plays, so it doesn't see one as better than another.

That was going to be my original suggestion, but then I realised there was really no upside in having the initial expiry, since you can just cancel the challenge (it would never be stuck there like stranger challenges can be for several days).

Confirmed.

Given the discussions in the challenge event, I think the way expiry dates work in challenges should be adjusted. Challenges with strangers are fine; expiration typically only happens when one person quits after starting and never completes the challenge. If it didn't expire, it would be stuck in your list permanently as you can't cancel after playing (which makes sense). Challenges with friends don't make sense though. Since you can't play until the other person accepts, they may accept just before the expiration date, leaving you no time to complete the challenge. My suggestion - don't have any expiry time on accepting a challenge. This has no downsides; while it's pending, the challenger can already cancel the challenge at any point, while the challengee can reject the challenge. The time limit (possibly with an option to set a longer range) should only start once a challenge is actually accepted.

Lots of lessons learnt on how to / how not to conduct a friendly tournament here. Whoever does the next one can learn from all my mistakes :) Still 28 hours until the 'official deadline' - hrothgar can play another 16 boards if he is happy to, but as he had already played through a full set of boards, doesn't have to - he can take a win by default if he chooses or can't play by then. Given the large first match margin I think is fair to have zebutin ranked highest. If the games can't be played, Phil can take a 1 IMP win as per his suggestion (given this means a win by default results in being ranked 'last', an alternate suggestion would be to be ranked in the middle).

Only if it were an advanced robot - sounds more like the OP might have been playing the free 'Bridge 4', where no simulations are done. However, even the basic bot will add 3 points for the spade void. 4♥ seems like a reasonable choice.

My results tally with yours. Round 2: Phil vs manudude03 ovncylmz vs smerriman olegru vs diana_eva dadim vs barmar zebutin vs eagles123 jeffford76 vs frank0 broze vs nullve hrothgar vs wackojack Results should be in within 7 days from now, which is, in your time zone: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20160907T13&p1=22

Oops, meant to say above - as neither has posted anything at all, planning to just drop them out when the olegru + gordontd match is complete.