smerriman

On top of not wanting to be in 4♥, you won't even end up there with GIB if you open 2♣ anyway; you'll end up in 3NT (unless you make a terrible 2♥ rebid), which is even worse. Would still open 2♣, but the end result is that you got lucky, rather than punished.

Oh, I had been thinking about this for quite a while and hadn't figured it out. The edited version with the 7 of diamonds makes things considerably simpler. I do wonder what the intended solution was without it, though. Oh right, typo, so it wasn't intended.

No, pilowsky won the first challenge 58-34.

Oops, yes, I should have said I would take *both* to be signoffs, with the former being a (rejected) quantitative invite (and not showing clubs).

I would take 1NT - 2♠ - 2NT - 3NT to be a signoff, so that you can play in 3NT when others are in 4NT after a quantitative invite. (But nf slam invite over a 3♣ response makes sense).

Have you tried just getting rid of the cookie manager add-on? This sounds like the most likely culprit, since one shouldn't be necessary at all. (Even though BBO's settings aren't stored in cookies at all, those types of add-ons can also clear localStorage). The "solution" by bbstar above isn't actually a solution at all, just a slighter quicker way to re-enter all of the settings you want to use after you've noticed they've disappeared without doing them one by one in BBO. Which is therefore still going to require you to do this once or twice a month. But exactly what code to use will depend on which settings you want to change.

Though as with any website, Googling with site:bridgebase.com/forums usually works much better.

smerriman vs Stephen Tu: 34 - 40 https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:c60c7de6.403d.11eb.bd23.0cc47a39aeb4-1608191962&u=smerriman&v3b=web&v3v=5.6.18 20 - 7 https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:1d5e00cc.40e8.11eb.bd23.0cc47a39aeb4-1608265123&u=smerriman&v3b=web&v3v=5.6.18 37 - 25 https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:148ce263.418c.11eb.bd23.0cc47a39aeb4-1608335546&u=smerriman&v3b=web&v3v=5.6.18 After 3 sets, I was winning by 19 IMP. After 3 sets and 5 boards, I was losing by 23 IMP. After 13 boards, I was winning by 7 IMP. After 15 boards, I was winning by 1 IMP. I lost the last board by 1 IMP. https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:36130eb9.41ae.11eb.bd23.0cc47a39aeb4-1608350205&u=smerriman&v3b=web&v3v=5.6.18 8-board tiebreaker to come..

Any particular reason? You do realise that you're not being compared against other people who are also playing the weekly free / who were able to complete it multiple times - you're being compared against a fixed set of players who played in the original tournament. (Always the same set, which is why you truly can compare your scores against YouTubers). It is IMO the best robot game offered on BBO - much better than daylongs which are all about the luck of the deal.

There was a sticky thread in the past, but it got unstickied at some point, probably because I was lazy in keeping it updated. I've added in Event 20 to that spreadsheet.

Both challenges completed successfully: https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:ed2184a0.3748.11eb.94ca.0cc47a39aeb4-1607207192&u=pilowsky https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:22b777fd.3cb4.11eb.94ca.0cc47a39aeb4-1607802993&u=gszes I will add the first to the results for completeness' sake. If you're the person to complete the challenge, the results pop up after a few seconds rather than get sent to your mailbox, though if you're closed BBO then you may not see them. They'll always appear under History -> Recent Tournaments though, so you can find them in there in future.

This has been tested to death; all suit breaks and splits follow completely normal percentages in every test that I've run so far over thousands of hands. Even if you haven't made a mistake in your calculations, 80 is a tiny sample statistically (and your actual sample will be even smaller by the time you've ruled out hands which don't qualify). I'm not even sure how you're defining finesses though, as a finesse that works for one side fails for the other, so balances out to 50% even if there's guaranteed bias (which there isn't). See, for example, this one, which used 2000 hands to demonstrate completely normal 3-2 breaks, and complete normal distributions of the Q when KJ was found in the North / South hand.

What exactly are you talking about? It's working exactly as intended and how it has worked for years - it resets once per week and you can play it as many times as you like. It's an extremely useful tool as you can play through the 8 boards at any time during the week and then compare with YouTubers such as Peter Hollands to see how they did on exactly the same hands, unlike daylongs. Why would playing in a free tournament be anything to do with buying points? I assumed nullve was posting this not to report something wrong, but just out of amusement that he managed to play over half the tournament before he realised he was too early and the week hadn't reset yet.

In goulash anything goes. It's definitely not a good strategy to use a standard bidding system (eg opening bids at all levels should have completely different meanings to standard), so how exactly are you going to determine what is a psych and what isn't?

I see cherdano has just beaten muddylane by just enough to pip shuba for 4th spot. ( https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:9005f538.3f79.11eb.bd23.0cc47a39aeb4-1608107690 ) Congrats to all of the top 4 (and billyfung for a clear gap back to 2nd. I mean, me :) ). Semifinals are as usual four 16 board challenges. With Christmas approaching, I won't set any strict deadlines, but please communicate amongst yourselves as to availability. @Stephen Tu - you can challenge me whenever you're ready; I'm happy with it autoaccepting.

https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:e6555c3f.3f32.11eb.94ca.0cc47a39aeb4-1608077341&u=smerriman&v3b=web&v3v=5.6.18 smerriman 23 - 30 icycookie

https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:d57547c4.3f32.11eb.94ca.0cc47a39aeb4-1608077312&u=smerriman&v3b=web&v3v=5.6.18 smerriman 41 - 5 hrothgar

Given GIB isn't being improved anymore and most posts in that forum are therefore unanswered and possibly not even read, and support@bridgebase.com hasn't replied when I contacted them 10 days ago, I'm posting this here in the hope it gets seen. Can this one-character fix be applied?

Preempts are one area where GIB really does change its bid based on vulnerability. White v white, red v white, and white v red it overcalls 1♥ with that hand; only 3♥ when red v red. While I agree 3♥ is silly, the answer to your question is yes; when GIB is vulnerable you can be confident its preempts are based on pretty good hands. I can't think of any hand GIB would bid 3♥ here where you don't want to be in game.

Further research has shown I should have just bid the slam as South even after hearing the missing queen, given the fact of the missing 7 hearts, partner is favorite to hold the jack: JTxx: 57.9130% (10 ways) Jxxx: 53.1304% (10 ways) xxxx: 40.6957% (15 ways) ---- 49.1677% overall opposite 4 cards JTxxx: 89% (10) other: 78% (11) ---- 83.2381% overall opposite 5 cards So the cases of a 5 card suit are enough to lift the odds past 50%. If partner shows two aces without the queen, it's going to be a more difficult decision.

I did go with 4NT, since it seemed pretty clear to me the only important cards were the two aces and queen of trumps. In a similar vein to what Cyberyeti suspected, partner held one ace and five small trumps, and we missed a trivial laydown slam since neither of us knew the other held an extra trump. Is this an unsolvable problem?

Huh? You're making no sense at all. The OP is not playing SAYC; I was using SAYC as an example. In SAYC, a 2/1 bid shows 10+, and promises a rebid. Which you said was ludicrous (despite being similar to other systems when a 2/1 is not game forcing), when it is not. No idea what you mean by 'another reason to avoid 2/1'; does that mean you'd bid 1NT, which is the only non-2/1 bid over 1♠?

Have you tried plugging into your router with an ethernet cable? Sounds like a poor wifi connection.

[hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?s=SKHAK962DQCAKQT62&a=1CP1HP&d=s]200|300[/hv] Vanilla 2/1. Hopefully you agree with 1♣. What next?

While I don't play SAYC, why is it ludicrous? The 2/1 promises enough strength to force to 2NT, so (as already mentioned above), it's ludicrous that opener has to jump with a 14 count.