smerriman

Diamonds were never shown; this is another issue with the 1♦ bid being described as 1+♦ (natural or clubs) but without any good followup to clarify.

I'm not sure how excluding balanced hands would 'go in that direction', remembering that we're talking about Just Declare tournaments, where all bidding is done for you, and it's only the play that matters.

I've made 5 of them so far with these contracts (which isn't necessarily much of a spoiler since the route to them + the play is all relevant):

Hands are dealt randomly. Hand constructing deals to always be 'interesting' would be incredibly difficult, and also introduce bias that would ruin the game a bit (though funnily, some conspiracy theorists believe this already happens :) ). But yes, in tournaments with a small number of boards, being dealt flat hands means you can't achieve a high score, which makes overall leaderboards where people play different boards pretty meaningless. But it's BBOs method of preventing cheating.

2♣ every day of the week. You'll never be able to show your shape if you start with 1♠, while you lose nothing by starting with 2♣.

Scrub that, got 100% on board 3. Just board 8 to go now. edit - Success! 100% on all boards :) Hooray.

Yes, the weekly free is the same for everyone for the whole week. Got board 5 now, so just 3 + 8 to go, though both look impossible to me.

Are you sure you were checking on the Sunday that it runs? (Which may be dependent on your timezone).

My best scores for this week so far are:

Argine reached two *very* silly 2NT contracts in the last tournament. [hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=st%7C%7Cmd%7C2SK83HAQ653DAT84CK%2CSAQJ2HDKQJ652CQ76%2CST54HT742D9C98432%2CS976HKJ98D73CAJT5%7Csv%7CB%7Cah%7CBoard%204%7Cmb%7C1D%7Can%7C4%2B%21D%3B%20HCP%2011-23%3B%204-card%20%21D%20opener%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C1H%7Can%7C4%2B%21H%3B%20HCP%204%2B%3B%20natural%20-%20Forcing%7Cmb%7C1N%7Can%7C2%2B%21C%3B%202%2B%21D%3B%202-4%21H%3B%202-4%21S%3B%20HCP%2016-18%3B%20balanced%2C%20no%205-card%20major%7Cmb%7C2S%7Can%7C5%2B%21D%3B%204-5%21S%3B%20HCP%2015-23%3B%20two-suiter%2C%20reverse%20-%20Forcing%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C2N%21%7Can%7C4%2B%21H%3B%20HCP%204%2B%3B%202NT%20scrambling.%20Weak%2C%20rebid%20longest%20suit%20if%20minimum%20-%20Forcing%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CSJ%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CS7%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cpc%7CSQ%7Cpc%7CST%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CS9%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CDT%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CH9%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CHK%7C]400|300[/hv] A silly 1NT by me, I know. But when East held a nice 9 count opposite a reverse, it decided to bid an artificial, forcing, weak, 2NT. Maybe its system says you can show this hand type by starting with a forcing 2NT, then correcting to 3NT.. but we'll never know, since West passed! Forcing, not forcing strikes again. [hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=st%7C%7Cmd%7C2S8652HADKT76CAJ82%2CSKQ3HJ4DJ84CK9654%2CSAT9HK8732D53CQT3%2CSJ74HQT965DAQ92C7%7Csv%7C0%7Cah%7CBoard%208%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C1D%7Can%7C4%2B%21D%3B%20HCP%2011-23%3B%204-card%20%21D%20opener%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C1H%7Can%7C4%2B%21H%3B%20HCP%204-11%3B%20natural%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C1S%7Can%7C4%2B%21D%3B%204-5%21S%3B%20HCP%2011-19%3B%20natural%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C1N%7Can%7C4%2B%21H%3B%20HCP%205-10%3B%20no%20fit%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C2C%7Can%7C5-7%21C%3B%20HCP%205-11%3B%20natural%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C2N%7Can%7CHCP%2010-11%3B%20invitational%20hand%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CSQ%7Cpc%7CST%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CDT%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CS9%7Cpc%7CSJ%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CS7%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CH9%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CD2%7C]400|300[/hv] The second was after West, a thrice passed hand, decided to bizarrely balance with 2C in the type of auction you're always taught not to balance in. But this was outdone by East, who felt their misfitting 9 count was worth a 2NT invite.

I don't know about any books. Hard to find many references but This PDF says that "most" play it as natural in the minors, and Larry Cohen prefers that as well (with a comment above his saying expert standard is sometimes natural in the minors, though that commenter also didn't like it). Of course, undiscussed I wouldn't make the bid over a minor in the first place just to be safe (but would have no hesitation making it over a major).

Undiscussed I would assume natural over a minor, but a stopper ask over a major.

The older version of the bidding database says that if the database suggests 3NT in this sequence (which it does), bid it without simulating. If I disable that flag, it picks 4♠ much more often than 3NT.

Instant tournaments take a fixed set of players from an old tournament, give you the same hands they had, and compare your scores against them as if you were one extra player in that tournament. The free weekly tournament is always the same tournament and the same players for the entire week. So you're not being compared against other people who are playing the free weekly tournament; the other scores are fixed in stone by players who didn't know what the hands were at the time. So if you play the tournament multiple times and make the same bids / plays, you'll get the same score every time. But you're not inconveniencing anyone else by doing so, because your score won't show up if someone else plays it. The only way you can achieve a 100% score is thus by doing *strictly better* than all of those players on every hand. Which is why in this challenge some 100%s are impossible (there were three hands where it was literally impossible to score 100% last week - like the hand where one of those older players made 7NT, so you could get only get a 100% by making 7NTx, and no matter what sequence you tried, there wasn't any situation where GIB doubles. The best you could do there was making 7NT too, and getting a score of 90something%.)

It's an issue with BBO's cache serving out of date files. A hard refresh is a sufficient quick fix for the time being.

That's pretty insane, because the people in the other tables were playing a real tournament, where they had no idea what their partner held. Much easier to score 100% in the weekly free knowing the cards!

[hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?n=ST84HT8DQ9532CJ93&v=b&d=s&a=2CP2DP2HP]200|300[/hv] What do you bid here? Some may have started with a 2♥ double negative. Argine doesn't play that. GIB would have continued with 3♣, cheaper minor, which while OK here, is one of the most broken definitions in the GIB database (since it bids it when having a natural club bid too, and as a result is one of the most commonly reported bugs). No other robot could be as bad as that. But Argine doesn't play that either. Argine..

Oops, forgot to come back to this. I guess I would win, ruff a club, throw a club on the ace, ruff spade, ruff club, ruff spade, and draw trumps. But I admit I'm a little baffled since I was sure North's diamond was a singleton, and if so South should be able to get us down 1 by giving North a ruff at trick 2, contradicting the title of 4♥ being par.

Perhaps you've been watching robots rather than people :)

Leave the opponents guessing about the ♦3? Other than playing a high diamond and the 6, I'll defer my plan until I see what South does next.

I keep seeing 'The quest for the 100%' videos by Hanoi5 in BBO's newsfeed - but have never once clicked on one before, thinking it was just someone playing normal tournaments with a dream of one day scoring 100%. I happened to click on one today.. and it's actually incredibly interesting. The idea is to play BBO's weekly free instant tournament over and over - thus knowing what the hands are, as the tournament only resets once per week (and you're compared against the same set of players who played in a real tournament some time in the past) - trying to achieve a perfect score of 100%. So this is really nothing to do with bridge and more about figuring out ways to psyche + trick GIB into giving you extra tricks, or double an unbeatable contract - definitely up my alley. Some hands are trivial - e.g. just bid slam when it makes double dummy and nobody else bid it - but some are very tough, potentially impossible (the top score was 7NT, is there a way of trick GIB into doubling?) So I'm definitely going to be giving this a go each week now. Posting this here in case others find this interesting too and wanted to join in.

Four interesting hands in a single tournament. This forcing / non-forcing thing seems to be a recurring theme with Argine. [hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|~~v3fakebot,~~v3fakebot,smerriman,~~v3fakebot|md|4ST7HJTDAKQ9CKQ973,SK543HA8653D73CJ6,SQJ9HK2DT864CA842,SA862HQ974DJ52CT5|sv|e|rh||ah|Board%206|mb|P|mb|1C|an|4+!C;%20HCP%2011-23;%20natural|mb|P|mb|1D|an|1+!D;%20HCP%204+;%20natural%20or%20fit%20in%20!C%20-%20Forcing|mb|P|mb|2D|an|5+!C;%204-5!D;%20HCP%2011-16;%20natural|mb|P|mb|3C|an|4+!C;%201+!D;%20HCP%2010+;%20fit%20in%20!C%20-%20Forcing|mb|P|mb|3D|an|5+!C;%205!D;%20HCP%2011-14;%20natural|mb|P|mb|4C|an|4+!C;%201+!D;%20HCP%2016+;%20fit%20in%20!C%20-%20Forcing|mb|P|mb|5C|an|5+!C;%205!D;%20HCP%2011-13;%20fit%20in%20!C|mb|P|mb|5D|an|4+!C;%202+!D;%20HCP%2016-18;%20preference%20for%20this%20suit|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|H7|pc|HJ|pc|HA|pc|H2|pc|CJ|pc|C2|pc|C5|pc|CK|pc|DA|pc|D7|pc|D4|pc|D5|pc|DK|pc|D3|pc|D6|pc|D2|pc|DQ|pc|H6|pc|D8|pc|DJ|pc|C3|pc|C6|pc|CA|pc|CT|pc|C4|pc|H4|pc|CQ|pc|S4|pc|C9|pc|S3|pc|C8|pc|S6|pc|C7|pc|H3|pc|SJ|pc|S2|pc|HT|pc|H5|pc|HK|pc|H9|pc|S9|pc|S8|pc|S7|pc|SK|pc|S5|pc|SQ|pc|SA|pc|ST|pc|HQ|pc|D9|pc|H8|pc|DT|]400|300[/hv] After I show a minimum opener with diamond 'support' (except this is the funny 1+ diamond description again), Argine bids 3♣ with a flat 10 count.. forcing. I have no bids that match my hand, so I try 3♦ even though that promises a 5th diamond. Nope, Argine insists on clubs, now showing 16+ points, and again forcing. I give in and raise to game, only for Argine to suddenly decide it prefers diamonds after all :) Well, they were both down anyway - I expect Argine would have passed out the 'forcing' 3♣. Twice Argine forgot that 'the 5 level belongs to the opponents' - feels like this is something I could exploit more: [hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|smerriman,~~v3fakebot,~~v3fakebot,~~v3fakebot|md|1SJHQ52DAK5CKQ8642,SKT952H98DQ9CJ753,S843HJ43DJ863CAT9,SAQ76HAKT76DT742C|sv|b|rh||ah|Board%207|mb|1C|an|4+!C;%20HCP%2011-23;%20natural|mb|P|mb|1D|an|1+!D;%20HCP%204+;%20natural%20or%20fit%20in%20!C%20-%20Forcing|mb|1H|an|5+!H;%20HCP%209-17;%20natural|mb|D!|an|4+!C;%20HCP%2014-23;%20extra%20strength,%20at%20least%2014%20points%20-%20Non%20forcing|mb|P|an|HCP%2011-;%20minimum|mb|2C|an|3+!C;%201+!D;%20HCP%204-10;%20weak%20hand|mb|P|mb|P|mb|2S|an|5-7!S;%20HCP%205-11;%20natural|mb|P|mb|4S|an|5+!H;%203-4!S;%20HCP%209-17;%20fit|mb|5C|an|5+!C;%20HCP%2014;%20natural|mb|P|mb|P|mb|5S|an|5+!H;%203-4!S;%20HCP%209-17;%20hope%20of%20slam|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|CA|pc|S6|pc|C2|pc|C3|pc|HK|pc|H2|pc|H8|pc|H3|pc|HA|pc|H5|pc|H9|pc|H4|pc|HT|pc|HQ|pc|S9|pc|HJ|pc|C5|pc|CT|pc|S7|pc|C4|pc|SQ|pc|SJ|pc|S2|pc|S3|pc|SA|pc|C6|pc|S5|pc|S4|pc|H6|pc|D5|pc|D9|pc|S8|pc|D6|pc|D2|pc|DK|pc|DQ|pc|CK|pc|C7|pc|C9|pc|D4|pc|CQ|pc|CJ|pc|D3|pc|D7|pc|DA|pc|ST|pc|D8|pc|DT|pc|SK|pc|DJ|pc|H7|pc|C8|]400|300[/hv] Both myself and East were willing to pass out 2♣.. but after I make a gamble with 5♣, I'm saved by an interesting 5♠ bid. [hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|smerriman,~~v3fakebot,~~v3fakebot,~~v3fakebot|md|2SKQ4HDAK9853CKQ53,SJ965HAQJ732DTCAJ,S8HKT85D762CT9864,SAT732H964DQJ4C72|sv|b|rh||ah|Board%204|mb|1H|an|4+!H;%20HCP%2011-20;%20natural|mb|P|mb|1S|an|4+!S;%20HCP%204+;%20natural%20-%20Forcing|mb|2D|an|5+!D;%20HCP%209-17;%20natural|mb|3S|an|4+!H;%204!S;%20HCP%2014-17;%20fit%20in%20!S|mb|P|mb|4S|an|4+!S;%20HCP%2010-15;%20to%20play|mb|5D|an|6+!D;%20HCP%209-17;%20natural|mb|5S|an|4+!H;%204!S;%20HCP%2014-17;%20to%20play|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|DK|pc|DT|pc|D2|pc|D4|pc|CK|pc|CA|pc|C4|pc|C7|pc|S5|pc|S8|pc|ST|pc|SQ|pc|CQ|pc|CJ|pc|C6|pc|C2|pc|C3|pc|H2|pc|C8|pc|S3|pc|DQ|pc|DA|pc|S6|pc|D6|pc|SJ|pc|CT|pc|SA|pc|S4|pc|S2|pc|SK|pc|S9|pc|D7|pc|D9|pc|H3|pc|H8|pc|DJ|pc|H4|pc|D3|pc|HA|pc|H5|pc|HJ|pc|HT|pc|H9|pc|D5|pc|H7|pc|HK|pc|H6|pc|C5|pc|C9|pc|S7|pc|D8|pc|HQ|]400|300[/hv] And same again here, except this time they went down 3. [hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|~~v3fakebot,~~v3fakebot,smerriman,~~v3fakebot|md|3SKQ7HAKJT97DJ943C,S964H853DKT86CJ82,SAJ852HQDA2CQT943,ST3H642DQ75CAK765|sv|n|rh||ah|Board%205|mb|1S|an|4+!S;%20HCP%2011-20;%20natural|mb|P|mb|2H|an|5+!H;%20HCP%2010+;%20natural%20-%20Forcing|mb|P|mb|2S|an|5+!S;%20HCP%2011-20;%20natural%20-%20Forcing|mb|P|mb|4C!|an|5+!H;%204-6!S;%20HCP%2012+;%20Splinter,%20shortness%20in%20this%20suit%20and%20big%20fit%20in%20last%20suit%20bid%20-%20Game%20forcing|mb|P|mb|4S!|an|5+!S;%20HCP%2011-20;%20no%20control%20in%20!D%20or%20minimum%20-%20Non%20forcing|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|CA|pc|S7|pc|C2|pc|C3|pc|SK|pc|S4|pc|S2|pc|S3|pc|SQ|pc|S6|pc|S5|pc|ST|pc|D3|pc|D8|pc|DA|pc|D5|pc|SA|pc|C6|pc|D4|pc|S9|pc|SJ|pc|C5|pc|D9|pc|D6|pc|S8|pc|H2|pc|DJ|pc|DT|mc|13|]400|300[/hv] And lastly, another splinter that could have gone better. I don't know why Argine has inherited GIB's annoying habit of bypassing cuebids with 'minimums', however you define minimum. My splinter did 'show' 4 spades, though it's so hard to find forcing bids in ACOL.

Are you talking about tables in the Main Bridge Club? You will only get a score when other tables have played; but there is a bit of caching going on so it may simply be that the full list of other tables hasn't refreshed yet.

Ha, I've only seen the word used on BridgeWinners and didn't understand what it meant either; figured it must be a bridge thing :)