Stefan_O

3C was explained as: "4+♣; 2-♥; 9 total points"

HA-HA-HA!! :D :D :D You are just TOO MUCH, Lycier! I start believing you are a ROBOT, too!! :D :D :D :D

I don't think the Double over 3♣ is wrong -- generally you can double with almost any distribution 19+hcp, since you can then come back with your longest suit next round. The problem on this specific hand, of course, is that South with a bit different hand might jump to 5♦ over the Double, expecting North to have a least secondary support in diamonds -- that would be awkward to say the least.... :huh: But on the bidding in your diagram, I think it's wrong from North to pass 4♣ -- with North's hand it must be almost certain that N/S has game in one of the majors. North should rebid 4♥ on the second round, and South presumably correct to 4♠ -- hopefully that's not a cue-bid :)

Thanks iandayre, Yes, that seems like useful knowledge.

Hi Lycier, Yes, you seem to disagree with pretty much everything --- so I will not take it personally :D

Yes, gwnn, point taken B-) I generally fare pretty well with Gib as a pd -- much more satisfactory/entertaining than playing with random pickup pds, who will usually mess up every second board or so. Only, when stuff like this happen -- at the same time both a bit upsetting and hilarious, it may sometimes be hard to restrain oneself... sorry -- I will try to consider your advice next time :)

Yes, the unnamed human South ;) I can tell you... he wanted of course to bid 5♦ on the second round to give pd a choice between suits, -- the only fly in the ointment was that 5♦ had a description "cuebid" rather than "natural" associated with it. Therefore, he was under the impression such action might lead to undesired consequences --- little did he know.... :D

Actually after the first Double to the left, 6S looked like it did have a chance --- until you see the bad breaks in both spades and hearts. As the cards lie, I think, even 5S can be made only by taking the heart finesse (double dummy play).

Yes, I know --- after all, it's a ROBOT :D :D Otherwise, human sense might tell you the Double might mean something, and 5S Doubled or Redoubled might be a safer spot than 6S or 7S :) But is it actually intended as forcing pass over 5C? I was not aware Gib had such devices in high-level competition... and I've never seen a PASS alerted.

http://s32.postimg.org/r0bnth751/6sx.png Robot-North did NOT have anything to say over 5♣ (was it forcing pass????), then when balancing 5♠ gets DOUBLED, it starts CUE-BIDDING!!! :D :blink: :blink: :blink: :D And this was money-bridge! :ph34r: :ph34r: :ph34r: Hand-viewer link

Yes, it can be an issue if ♥ is trumps and the 4NT-bidder has trump-queen himself and only 1 ace, i.e. he wants to be in slam only when pd has 3 Aces (but not 2 aces + extra trump length). So consequently, if you play this method and want go the safe way, he should not bid 4NT but quebid instead, and let his pd take command.

No, you are right. Gib North has options here. Logically, something like: 2♥ ~ 6-9 3♥ ~ 10-11 4♥ ~ 12+ (In more advanced methods, perhaps also has the option of first forcing with 3♣.) On this hand, presumably, N should bid 4♥ over pd's takeout-X.

Could it be that 6NT was based on simulation, while opener took it by the description? Good example for the robot-developers to look into....

Yes, robot-west seems to have a misunderstanding with himself on this one :) Also, this hand seems more appropriate for 2♥ in the first round, rather than XX. XX should ideally show a 3 suiter with shortness in opener's suit -- or at least 443 in the unbid suits, with no other suitable bid.

Hi Fred, Would be interested, if you could give an update what happened on this after December? Did it turn out the way you were hoping? Is it in use? And, what was it about? :)

One idea, if BBO does not have the motivation, skills or whatever needed to maintain and improve Gib... Couldn't BBO cut a deal with some of the stronger competitors in the computer-championships (Wbridge, Jack, ...) where (I think?) the software is still under active development... -- maybe it's time to retire and replace the good ol' Gib :) Has this possibility already been suggested or discussed?

OK... what was it particularly that happened a few months ago? An announcement? Or what?

In Gib's system, 1♦-2♣ is forcing to 3NT -- check the description next time you see it... But regardless, there are many similar sequences... Like, 1♥-2♣-3♣, just to give an example...

There is a quite common type of situations, where the robot bidding-system is very un-helpful. General situation is: You are in a game-forcing sequence and there is still bidding-space available to explore a possible slam or finding the best game-contract. One trivial example is this: 1♦ - 2♣ 2♦ - 3♦ ? We are in an obvious situation, where either player might have extra values, and want to explore a possible (diamond) slam. The other possibility is, that we want to play 3NT only if the pair has both majors stopped, otherwise 5♦ is often a better bet. So above, what does 3♥/3♠ mean here? The Gib description simply says, like: 4+cards in the suit bid, 11-21 HCP. which I hope ZERO descent players would agree with. Even more useless is the continuation... if opener bids 3♥ above --- after that, what does 3♠ from responder mean? Again, Gib description just says: 4+spades, 12+HCP. Que?? Why????? If responder has a spade-suit, he would of course have bid 1♠ or 2♠ in the previous rounds. In the above sequence, I would say 3♥/3♠ from opener primarily shows a stopper, and asks pd to bid 3NT only with stopper in the unbid suit. This is so we can avoid a hopeless 3NT when both players are missing stopper in one of the majors. Alternatively, 3♥/3♠ can also be a premature que-bid with slam-interest, in which case opener in the next round will proceed with a new que-bid, blackwood or other methods. Isn't this the method that most players use, if nothing agreed? It's like the Gib definitions for these sequences have been defined by a complete novice. The sequence above is just a typical example, there are many similar situations where a new suit on the 3 level should not be natural as Gib "believes" (because either or both players have already denied 4 cards in the suit) but should be showing/asking for stopper, or possibly be a slamtry, which will then be clarified in the next round(s). Would be nice, if something could be done about this! :) As it is now, you often have to gamble 3NT not knowing if you have an unbid suit stopped. And exploring slam often gets restricted to Blackwood as the only option, rather than cooperative que-bidding, etc, between the players.

Hi viking, cant help you with that, sorry, but this forum is for robot-bridge discussions. sounds more like you have a general support issue... post here instead, for help -- BBO Support Forum: http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/forum/11-bbo-support-forum/

Actually found some info here: https://www.bridgebase.com/doc/gib_descriptions.php See the bottom section, "Why doesn't the robot's hand always match the description?"

Well, what I have understood, that is just how Gib is supposed to work. At least it was, long time ago when Matt Ginsberg quit the development. After that, we really dont have much info re. what has been done to the code-base -- or do we?

I agree. just wondering how weak 3S actually is here... I see no description of bids in the diagram...

Have you posted (or can u post) some actual hand-records of this? Would be interesting to have a look. (haven't really noticed this as significant issues...)