smerriman

2♣ is forcing to game. 4sf is a way to create a game forcing auction. Thus that convention doesn't exist here. (Though some people say it when they really just mean an unrelated fourth suit artificial.) Some play the fourth suit here as a 'punt', but GIB plays it as natural. Much more common is when you have a 4 card major and 5 card minor, where if you start with a 1 over 1 you'll never be able to properly describe your hand later. But agree it should really be a punt here. Aside from that, 3♣ "shows" 6 clubs but should result in the right outcome (if you get a club raise it's where you want to be anyway).

Couldn't agree more :) If you replaced yourself with the best bridge player in the world, they would have scored 0% on this hand. Almost every hand you've posted on the forums are bad scores due to your opponents or partner (and not maliciously; just misguided belief that it must have been your mistake). That's very frustrating, but implies your ability at the game isn't in question.

GIB's cuebidding is broken -as you can see your bid promised 25+ total points. GIB adds up the points and concludes you can't be missing any important cards, so has no need for Blackwood. If you really had 25+ total points, 7♠ would have made. You weren't going to find out anything useful over 4♦ anyway, so just bid 4NT over 4♣ and you're sorted. (Of course, 6♠ goes down, but it's the contract you want to be in.)

Nope. 1♣ - 2♣ for Argine is 5+♣, 5-10 HCP.

That's why as others have mentioned, you simply have to change your definition of bad. You should be happy with a hand like the above where you played your hand perfectly and scored 0% due to factors out of your control.

Twice over the last few days I've attempted to open BBO, and it gets stuck at https://www.bridgebase.com/v3/ with the loading spinner. According to devtools, https://static.bridgebaseonline.com/v3/runtime.2b68315d93bf8868f808.js is giving a 404, and I have to do a force-refresh to get it to load the up to date files. Seems to be a caching / CloudFlare issue.

FYP.

There are some details here: https://doc.bridgebase.com/Help/Acol-robot-system-notes.html But there are also some strange bids that are just strange bids :)

2♠ is non-forcing, showing 6 spades and a weak hand. You definitely don't want to do that! With standard methods, 3NT seems normal. Edit - actually, my double dummy sim was based on the definition of 3NT shown, but that definition seems to be problematic, since the majority of such hands would have opened 2NT.. so GIB is at fault here, as per usual.

GIB doesn't have any bids to investigate slam scientifically over 3NT. So the only way to end up at slam is to bid it immediately. I calculate 6♥ is makeable (double dummy, of course) opposite 80% of all the possible hands you might hold for 3NT. So this seems OK to me.

I expect you've placed a robot in the other seats, and the only human became dummy, so the robots are playing the hand. If you don't want robots to play, you should sit in the other seats yourself (you can sit in multiple seats to play the other hands). Of course, the human will still be dummy and unable to play themselves. Unless you get them to change seats with you.

Yes, all the hands held 6 hearts as well as 5 clubs. But you're right; there is something else going on. When I tested this earlier, I ran simulations when North passed 4♥, because something was going funny when North was doubling and it wasn't showing simulated hands at all. East was always passing 4♥, but I saw 5♣ wasn't too far behind, and thought maybe that meant a penalty double could cause it to try the other. But I've just realised what the 'something funny' was. As everyone is well aware, you should never dare a penalty double playing with GIB, since it usually pulls it. While N/S aren't GIB at all, East assumes they are. In 100% of simulated hands here, East sees that if it passes, the database will tell South to bid 4♠, so it thinks there is a 0% chance of being left to play in 4♥x. I guess that faulty assumption, combined with the expected 6-5 shape for West and North having some hearts, makes it reasonably harmless to bid 5♣ now.

Need an ACOL expert to confirm, but I don't think this can be right: [hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|smerriman,~~v3fakebot,~~v3fakebot,~~v3fakebot|md|1SAQ5HKJ9DKT82CK97,SKJ96H65D9CAQJ643,ST742HAT7DQJ53CT8,S83HQ8432DA764C52|sv|b|rh||ah|Board%207|mb|1D|an|4+!D;%20HCP%2011-3;%204-card%20!D%20opener|mb|2C|an|5+!C;%20HCP%209-17;%20natural|mb|D!|an|HCP%206+;%20take-out%20-%20Non%20forcing|mb|P|an|HCP%208-;%20weak%20hand|mb|2N|an|2+!C;%204-5!D;%202-4!H;%202-4!S;%20HCP%2015-19;%20balanced%20-%20Game%20forcing|mb|P|mb|3D|an|4+!D;%20HCP%208-10;%20natural|mb|P|mb|3N|an|2+!C;%204-5!D;%202-4!H;%202-4!S;%20HCP%2015-19;%20game,%20to%20play|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|CQ|pc|C8|pc|C2|pc|C7|pc|H6|pc|HT|pc|HQ|pc|HK|pc|D2|pc|D9|pc|DJ|pc|DA|pc|C5|pc|C9|pc|CJ|pc|CT|pc|CA|pc|S2|pc|H3|pc|CK|pc|C3|pc|S4|pc|H2|pc|S5|pc|C6|pc|S7|pc|H4|pc|SQ|pc|C4|pc|D3|pc|S8|pc|H9|pc|SK|pc|ST|pc|S3|pc|SA|mc|6|]400|300[/hv] Double is "6+ HCP, takeout" 2N is "15-19 HCP, game forcing" My other options were to show a 4 card major, or rebid 2♦, which showed 12-14.. This is the second negative double issue I've seen, with the other being that 1♥ (1♠) x showed 10+ points and said nothing about suits. Also, I only just noticed a hand thepossum posted in the other thread. It was edited in later, so others might have missed it too. Well worth looking at, because it is truly insane :)

I ran this through the old version of GIB. Despite it also having a definition of 4+ clubs for 4♥, every single simulated hand it gave West held 5 clubs. I still haven't achieved my goal of fully reverse engineering exactly how the simulated hands work. It may simply be a case of that being the only way it can make up the required number of points in West's hand. It's true West has their hand, but North and South doesn't.. if GIB is assuming South has an extra king for their bid, West is going to need a lot more distribution to make up their hand. GIB does tend to believe its opponents way too much; if it is assuming West must have a lot of extra distribution, it may be slightly more understandable that 5♣ could work out better than 4♥x.

No, it's the other way around - the advantage of right-siding should be greater than the double dummy numbers show. When the above numbers show an advantage, it's a guaranteed advantage - all 4 suits fail when leading into the strong hand, so you always win. Well, not guaranteed; the winning lead on the other side may not be found. But there should be more hands where you'll get a benefit that weren't in the numbers, because the leader usually has a harder decision to make when leading into the strong hand, making more room for mistakes.

I mentioned it in that thread, but I'll mention it again here; the double dummy numbers are basically showing how often you have *four* tenaces you need to protect. Any time there's a single safe lead (which is virtually almost always), it assumes the defense will find it. The true value of right-siding has to take into account the probability the defense won't find a safe lead, which those numbers don't show at all.

Agree having a minor splinter is pretty silly in the first place. To GIB 4♣ over 3♦ shows a maximum with club support, which would have worked out well as it would have then followed up with Blackwood and then put you in 6♣, which you could correct to 6NT if you thought that was best. After 3NT, GIB's book bid is 4NT quantitative, which would also have worked out well. But GIB simulates to see if something else will work better. One problem here is that it thinks you'd only accept a quantitative 4NT with 17 HCP rather than some 16s. In this auction it's extremely rare for you to actually hold a 17 count in the first place. Since it doesn't run that many sims when bidding (under 20, if the old version of GIB is similar), most of the time a 17 count never even shows up. (Maybe influenced by a lack of 4♣ the first time?) So in almost all cases, all roads will lead to you responding 5♣ - because whether it bids 4N, 4♥, or even 4♠, it assumes you'll correct to the best partnership fit, which is 5♣ in virtually all cases, including this one (preferring a 4-3 heart fit to 5-4 clubs was a little odd, though not as odd as GIB's choices of course :) ). In reality, if you bid 5♣, it will then resimulate and raise to 6♣, so you would have gotten to slam that way too. But it doesn't know that when choosing a bid over 3NT - the "book bid" when it extrapolates the auction would be to pass 5♣ - so its decision making at that point won't work out to be very accurate. When I ran this with the old version of GIB, its most common continuation over 3NT was.. 5NT invitational to 7! But not because it wanted to play grand, just because it figured slam was worth a shot, and since those 17 counts weren't showing up, 5NT and 6NT tied for the best result, and the former just happened to be earlier in the database which broke the tie. Next most common, but almost as regular as 5N, was passing 3NT. Occasionally it bid 4N, when the 17 counts did appear. And on a rare occasion, it bid 4♥.. because a couple of the simulated hands had you holding 3253 shapes, where it expected you to correct 4♥ to 4♠ (everything else ending up in 5♣), and the database tell it to jump to 6N over 4♠, and on those hands 6NT made. I guess that's what would have happened in your case.

You should use the GIB forum. There isn't a good reason - it's just a bug with the description. GIB will bid 2♠ with 6-7 points as well when giving preference with 2 spades.

The same way you decide whether or not to open a 15-17 point balanced hand with a strong 1NT. If you have it, you bid it.

This is the worst play bug I've seen yet: [hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|smerriman,~~v3fakebot,~~v3fakebot,~~v3fakebot|md|1SK4HQ765DAKJCJT64,SJTHAT92DT72CAKQ9,S8532H3D98654C732,SAQ976HKJ84DQ3C85|sv|e|rh||ah|Board%203|mb|1N|an|2+!C;%202+!D;%202+!H;%202+!S;%20HCP%2012-14;%20balanced|mb|P|mb|P|an|HCP%2010-;%20weak%20hand|mb|2C!|an|4+!H;%204+!S;%20HCP%205+;%20Landy,%20two-suited,%20at%20least%204-4%20in%20majors%20-%20Forcing|mb|P|mb|3H|an|4+!H;%20HCP%205-12;%20invitational%20hand|mb|P|an|HCP%2010-;%20minimum|mb|P|an|4+!H;%204+!S;%20HCP%205-13;%20minimum|mb|P|pc|D4|pc|D3|pc|DJ|pc|D2|pc|DK|pc|D7|pc|D9|pc|DQ|pc|C4|pc|CQ|pc|C2|pc|C5|pc|H2|pc|H3|pc|HK|pc|H5|pc|H4|pc|H6|pc|H9|pc|S5|pc|HA|pc|S2|pc|H8|pc|H7|pc|HT|pc|C3|pc|HJ|pc|HQ|pc|DA|pc|DT|pc|D5|pc|S6|pc|CJ|pc|CK|pc|C7|pc|C8|pc|SJ|pc|S3|pc|SA|pc|S4|pc|S7|pc|SK|pc|ST|pc|S8|pc|CT|pc|CA|pc|D6|pc|S9|pc|C9|pc|D8|pc|SQ|pc|C6|]400|300[/hv] After 5 tricks, North has just shown out on the second trump. The hand is an open book, as I'm guaranteed the SK and DA for the opening bid. West has a trivial 10 tricks (eg duck a spade, ruff the diamond high, and take the marked finesse). Instead, West plays trump Ace and another, guaranteeing down 1.

Exactly. I think you had your statement backwards (it's a spade return that's fatal, rather than a heart). Edit - sorry, nevermind, I read fatal as fatal to the contract. Understand now.

[hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?pc=n&sn=SB&nn=TT&wn=RR&en=ChCh&s=SKQHAK52DK32C6542&n=st54ht64daqcajt87&e=saj987hq87djt98c9&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1np3nppp&p=s3s4sask]400|300[/hv] Not seeing a fatal heart return. But it does seem important whether this is a possible lead for RR. And even if it isn't, if you can assume RR would "never" lead the wrong card from Qxxx or xxx (and RR always seems capable of doing that), and if in another situation you could argue RR would just as equally "never" have led a singleton spade here, then it's complicated.

Argine appears to be just as hopeless at slam auctions as GIB is - in fact, I'd say worse. My post the other day had it bypassing all cuebids and Blackwood to leap to slam with a missing control and no clue about the number of keycards (* edit - sorry aces; the lack of keycard is another giant disadvantage). I never linked to the hand, so here it is in full. I managed to make it, but we could easily have been off two diamonds, let alone numerous other possibilities.. [hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|smerriman,~Mwest,~Mnorth,~Meast|md|2S52HKT83DKQJ98CAQ,SK9764H52DTCJ7654,SAQJ8HAQJ64D42C83,ST3H97DA7653CKT92|sv|o|rh||ah|Board%208|mb|P|mb|1H|an|4+!H;%20HCP%2011-20;%20natural|mb|P|mb|2N!|an|4+!H;%20HCP%2010+;%20fit%20and%20forcing%20to%20game%20-%20Forcing|mb|P|mb|3N|an|2-4!C;%202-4!D;%204!H;%202+!S;%20HCP%2015-17;%20balanced|mb|P|mb|4C!|an|4+!H;%20HCP%2015+;%20control%20in%20!C%20-%20Forcing|mb|P|mb|6H|an|2-4!C;%202-4!D;%204!H;%202+!S;%20HCP%2015-17;%20to%20play|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|H9|pc|H3|pc|H2|pc|HJ|pc|HA|pc|H7|pc|H8|pc|H5|pc|D2|pc|DA|pc|D8|pc|DT|pc|D5|pc|DK|pc|C4|pc|D4|pc|DQ|pc|S4|pc|C3|pc|D3|pc|DJ|pc|C5|pc|S8|pc|D6|pc|CA|pc|C6|pc|C8|pc|C2|pc|S2|pc|S6|pc|SJ|pc|S3|mc|12|]400|300[/hv] Today I tried a splinter.. (I was South): [hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|~~v3fakebot,~~v3fakebot,smerriman,~~v3fakebot|md|1SAQ54HJD765CAKJ82,SK6HAT9542DJT8CQ4,SJT972HKQ63DK42C6,S83H87DAQ93CT9753|sv|b|rh||ah|Board%207|mb|1C|an|4+!C;%20HCP%2011-23;%20natural|mb|1H|an|5+!H;%20HCP%208-17;%20natural|mb|1S!|an|5+!S;%20HCP%205+;%20at%20least%205!S%20-%20Forcing|mb|P|an|HCP%209-;%20weak%20hand|mb|4H!|an|4+!C;%204-5!S;%20HCP%2016-20;%20Splinter,%20shortness%20in%20this%20suit%20and%20big%20fit%20in%20last%20suit%20bid%20-%20Game%20forcing|mb|P|mb|5S|an|5+!S;%20HCP%205+;%20hope%20of%20slam|mb|P|mb|6S|an|4+!C;%204-5!S;%20HCP%2016-20;%20to%20play|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|H8|pc|HJ|pc|HA|pc|H3|pc|DJ|pc|D2|pc|DQ|pc|D5|pc|DA|pc|D6|pc|D8|pc|D4|pc|D3|pc|D7|pc|DT|pc|DK|pc|SJ|pc|S3|pc|S4|pc|SK|pc|HT|pc|HQ|pc|H7|pc|C2|mc|9|]400|300[/hv] Perhaps optimistic on my end, but 5♠?? With KQxx in their suit and four points outside? A 1.5% board dropped my average down to 70% :( (The field appears very weak at the moment.) Note the really bizarre diamond play by the robots too. GIB sees letting the J hold as *comfortably* the best play at MPs (and IMPs too); can't see any excuse for overtaking. Nope. Just GB,IE,AU,NZ.

GIB expects *much* better hearts for a 2♥ bid. 100% of simulated hands it gives you KJT963, so the ace and queen are always equivalent. It appears to prefer lowest of equals, so always plays the Q. Even when it adds some variation to allow you to stray slightly from your bid, it considers hands without the K too far removed to include them.

[hv=handviewer.html?s=SAQJ8HAQJ64D42C83&d=e&a=P1HP2NP3NP4CP]200|300[/hv] You are a robot. You've forgotten your name. You contemplate opening 1NT, but you can't remember whether you play a strong or weak NT, or which range this falls into anyway. So you open 1♥. Your human partner replies with Jacoby. You decide you like your hand - two doubletons after all - and bid 3NT to show 15-17 points. You receive a 4♣ control bid from your partner. What are you going to do about that xx in diamonds? If you're GIB, you can suspect things are about to go wrong.. But if you're Argine, you're easily a step up on GIB.