Bermy

Well then who programs this rubbish? In all my time playing bridge I have NEVER seen an unbid major suit after a double by opps to be a cue bid !!!!! Then a second cue?? This is absolute garbage really.

What can I say? This is what you get when you persist with Gib's crazy upside down methods of bidding. "If Gib knew how to add I would agree with calculations it has made." WOW really? Gib accepts opps bidding and not mine? What happened to trust your partner. No logic here can explain how a double cue could be possible here. The cue in hearts was available as well as many other options for a club fit. How on earth is one supposed to introduce the other major 5 or 6 times, just because east mentioned he may have a weak hand with a few? Its not a wonder Gib is such a mess, guys get your bidding theory right!

When the China national team lead by CC Wei finished runner up in the 1969 Bermuda Bowl the system now known as the Precision Club was recognized. Wei then went on to captain the Precision team to many more wonderful achievements. Since then many strong club systems have come to call themselves Precision. Most of them excellent improvements on the original. But let us not ignore what he gave us and how clever it was. It simplified what was previously the more complicated Italian Blue Club and started thousands, including myself playing Precision all over the world. Now few people play precision online anymore, and that is mainly because there is no longer a standard as to exactly what Precision is. Don’t forget what the Precision team achieved playing it exactly the Wei way. However in contradiction I have offered an enhancement with the multi 2 diamonds, an idea that has been around for years and used a lot. I also promote bringing in some modern enhancements like transfers to 1 club openings, Delta and Omega bids to bring it up to date. With these enhancements I call it Control Precision (see feed) and try to set standards that any 2 players can abide by. Well done Mr. Wei I will always love your system, the only one we can truly call “Precision” and 1 club will always be 16+.

If you are you talking about a 16 to 8 count? Yes if you like, however we have found other ways around the problem. 2 balanced hands will land up at 2NT or 3 major if bid properly with us. Read my previous post on adjusting by a point, and Control Precision Plus deals with this, I have no objection, its a preference, CC Wei remains for convenience.

$0.25 Daylong MP http://tinyurl.com/y9btp3yy Partner? Are you even listening to me? Anyway somehow I got 52% for this? You should see the rubbish E/W and North bidding at some of the other tables. Somehow all those who went straight on to 4S managed to go down.

So what does that say about Gib if 55% is not much better than most novices? Remember North Gib contributes to these results too, not to mention the rubbish I often see from E/W

Phew, you are persistent. I wish to promote CC Wei's system with my modification to his 2 diamond opening and a few updates. I'm not reinventing the wheel, using the multi 2D is an old idea to solve those original problems. What I'm really trying to do is introduce the idea of a simple standard so we all can play precision together in a simplified way. No, I'm not open to all the new ideas available as that would be counter productive. If you don't like Wei, I cant help you.

Yes, I get your point, but why is it every time I mention update to Precision somebody comes up with something different to complicate matters even more than necessary. Many years ago when I was a young aspiring young player I met Mr Gorozzo in a casual tournament. In awe I mentioned how I would love to play his Blue Club system but couldn’t get my head around his complicated relays. He recommended I read CC Wei as he had just simplified the strong club system he called Precision. CC Wei did exactly that. He gave us a simple system that we all could get our heads around, with simple HCP that one could teach to a novice. Ever since, due to the competitive nature of bridge players, people have been improving on the system, until now we absolutely no standard on what we call Precision. The original was simple and straight forward, but it had serious flaws in it, namely a poorly thought out 2 ♦ opening, and few solutions to dealing with 4441 hands. One needs to understand the system or language as I would have it, in its entirety, before one can open one’s mind to improvements, These improvements I call Control Precision Plus, and opens even more expert discussion to experienced players, who really want to explore the language in its entire complexity. Using my multi 2 ♦ method helps to solves some these problems. Control Precision is ideal for bringing on new Precision players, because it maintains CC Wei’s simplicity while clearly defining each partner’s role. Keep it that way, I see no reason to change that. New Precision players quickly understand their role as Controlling and Blind Partner and learn the advantages quite quickly. Suddenly they are finding contracts and slams that they were not finding before. The system does get complicated as there are a lot of sequences to understand and remember, so why is there always out there someone that wants to complicate it even more. I am suggesting a standard system I call Control Precision, a variation of simple CC Wei that uses my version of the 2 ♦ opening in order to complete what Mr. Wei started. Beyond that, players and partnerships can take the bidding to any dimension they like. It’s just that we need a simplified standard, so all can play the same way (Wei) :)

"Supposedly GIB advanced bots average 56-57% or so vs. humans" Come on accept my challenge. Play one Gib South at every robot tourney. This will have the effect of adding only 1 extra table, and the South Gib result can be published alongside us humans. I really do not believe that Gib would perform anywhere near 55%, perhaps once on a good day, but really on an average no way. Let us see how Gib would "brilliantly" bid and play these hands.

As I said, its all there, I have given you an outlying summary of the overall system, however I have not gone into the methods of relays we use. Control bidder has an armory of relays using weak, intermediate, strong and super strong bids, to guide blind partner and extract more information. We introduce Omega bids that do exactly that, by being able to ask exact information on specific suits outside 1 club openers when the responder is super strong. Also very important we introduce transfers in the majors after 1 club positive major so that the strong hand gets to play more contracts. (Currently used by many Chinese Precision players) Control Precision Plus deals with the point adjustment. I will post a feed on CP+ later as I do not recommend it until you have a full understanding of the outlining system,

The point count has been kept at the original Wei version for convenience. Naturally one can adjust it by a point either way, however this will effect the matrixes of all other opening bids, as I mentioned before.....every hand has its bid, so other bids have to also be adjusted according to fit everything. A robot designed properly may allow one to choose which point range you prefer. Partnerships can adjust accordingly too.

Control Precision I have spent years compiling a complete Precision System based on the original by CC Wei. The foundation underlying rule is that during the bidding we always have a controlling partner and a blind partner. “First to bid is always blind, unless opener bids one club and does not return to No Trumps.” Both Partners now know exactly who the controlling partner is, and who should make the important contractual decisions. The system summary is a follows, HCP should be counted as exact for first round of bidding. Opening Bids 1 ♣ All 16+ hands, except 4441, and Balanced 19-21Hcp 1 ♦ Catch all 11-15 singleton diamond possible. 1 Major 11-15 5 card major or more. 2 ♣ 11-15 5x♣ and another bid (4 card major, more ♣ or 5x♦ 2 ♦ Multi 2♦, includes weak 2 majors, strong 4441 hands and 19-21 NT balanced. 2 Major Weak 2 suites. 2NT Minor 2 suites (optional) 3 and 4 level Openings are pre-emptive. 3NT Gambling. Balanced hands open….. 11-12 Open 1♦ rebid NT. 13-15 Open 1NT 16-18 Open 1♣then bid nearest NT 19-21 Open 2♦then bid 2NT(reversible) 22-24 Open 1♣jump NT (reversible) 25+ Open 1♣ rebid 2NT Open 2NT is available. The system also includes Alpha, Beta Gamma and Delta bids for 1 club openings, Transfers of majors in 1 club openings, Bergen, Jacoby and Omega bids for super strong hands. Complete matrixes on how to deal with intervention has already been worked out. Control Precision also works with its own overcalling system, using reverse 1 over 1 overcall, NT take outs for minors and strong jump overcalls. Again with the first bidder being the blind bidder. Finally, we use Attitude leads and signals, which tie in the bidding with the defence, having a control defender too. This is just a simple summary, but as you can imagine I have already ironed out 99% of its problems, like methods of dealing with extra distributional values from the blind seat etc. I have now come to the point where every hand has its place in the bidding with the outcome already set. The multi 2 diamond is like the final piece in the whole jigsaw puzzle and it works. Naturally it’s not perfect, since bridge is not a perfect science and cannot allow for misplays, misleads or bad distribution from opps. No bidding method can bid for the opps hands. I believe that this system would be a dream for some would be programmer who would like to develop an alternative bidding system to the ones currently available for robots. Should anyone be interested in more information please contact me. (edited) :rolleyes:

Like moving deck chairs on the Titanic

Roll on Version 38, 39, 40 and so on and so on. Keep making excuses, let people hear. And thanks for the advise on other bridge sites, do they give ACBL masterpoints too? I was right in the first place, that Gib is the agenda of its programmers as to how they think 2/1 should be played. My survey proves that most disagree. The person who complains that everybody is riding the "wrong" way on the motorway? Gib cannot be relied on as a partner,a teaching tool or a gauge of true bridge ability, when psyches and poker bids and are the only way to get decent results.

OK so the results of this hand are out now and so I can comment with full hindsight. 1 player played 3NT+3 by opening 1 diamond and bidding 3NT when robot respnoded with 1 heart. Robot misdefended of course as it would not touch the psyched suit. Only 1 player bid 3 hearts from 32 players, making 4 hearts. 1 from 32 Understands this rubbish? For such a popular system only 1 from 32 could find the right contract? As I explained earlier 3 hearts from south at this point is a ridiculous bid, and is only going to work under special circumstances and double dummy. (he probably read this article first) As I predicted, the best prize went to the only player to pass the forcing 1NT earning 3 imps http://tinyurl.com/yc65aw3b Is this really how we should play 2/1? 6 players made 2NT or more by incorrectly passing the 2NT bid and having robot misdefend. (Also predicted) 18 players went down in 2NT or 3NT contracts, so Im not alone with this complaint, it seems like other want to bid properly too. I dont think any other bidding system would play this contract outside the 5-3 heart fit, finding game should not be difficult either. What about having Gib sitting south at one table at every tournament, so we can see how Gib would bid it. Carry on making excuses, but I seem to have the majority of support, judging by the bidding of 32 players.

This sounds like more excuses. I don't see any point in insulting the end user for not wanting to pay for rubbish. You sound like if you were assigned giving this shuttle service it would never leave the ground or drawing room. Robots that bid properly with multiple bidding systems DO exist and have done so for over 25 years now. 25 years ago I had a robot made by Saitek that had multiple bidding systems. 2/1 is mainly an American system and is not nearly as popular or as good as you may think, most of us only play 2/1 because we have to. The world robot bridge championships starts soon, go see what they are capable of. Take note Gib has not even bothered an entry.

The system places too much pressure on the blind bidder. After the 1NT relay opener is really quite blind to Norths hand and has to rely on North to make the contractual decisions. Something we all know Gib can't do well. Its almost as if we must now play poker to get a result, is that robot bridge? We have a few options, 1) Pass the forcing NT at the first round of bidding. (I love doing that, do you know how many 100% scores it gets me) 2) Pass the 2NT bid and get the diamond run against us to go down. (Gib will probably mislead anyway) 3) Bid 3 Hearts and risk a 4-3 or 3-3 contract. Gib will most likely bid 4 clubs to this, then what do I do? 4) Bid 3NT........well if you going to play poker bridge, no point giving away any more information. Is this the system we really want for robots?

Yes I figured as much after, however why do we have to endure such ridiculous bidding? We now have a system where we have to trust North (as you say) to handle these complicated and unnecessary bids. Surely the object of the players is to find the right fit and contract? Now declarer has to bid its 3 card suit to find some 5-3 fit? While trying to avoid a 4-3 (maybe a 3-3) contract in hearts or a bad 4 clubs contract is not out of the question. Declarer has to make the decision without spoiling the bidding, game is by no means certain after the 1NT relay. I can only advocate that the heart suit is shown as soon as possible, you cannot have 2 bids without showing the 5 carder and you cannot introduce NT without some diamond protection. "Notice 3N bid is listed as having les than 3H." the 2NT bid is not forcing its invitational, how can this be relevant?

No sooner have I noticed the welcome announcement of Gib 37 then this happens. Daylong imps $0.25 http://tinyurl.com/y8c6w6uh What kind of 2/1 bidding is this? Surely after I was showing 2 black suits I am entitled to believe that North will have both red suits covered? That there should be no possibility of a 5-3 fit in hearts? I can only describe this as total abuse of the 2/1 system and its forcing NT. I have long been an advocate of an alternative bidding systems and have made no secret of my dislike for 2/1 and Gib version of 2/1. Roll on 38, 39 40 and so on, but you will never get this rotten system right.

What Im saying is that last month alone I earned over 150 masterpoints playing these daylongs, far more than the 20-25 per month I was averaging before. I get better reward for my money when I finish well. Suddenly it appears as if nobody wants to play regular robot tourneys anymore as the rewards there are insufficient. I now have a lot of trouble finding tournaments with over 15 players anymore, the minimum we need for a full score of a measly 0.6 or less. Playing with less players is even less rewarding.

I have been playing bridge for over 50 years now and as you can well imagine I am a very experienced player. I love playing online as I live in a remote area gives me all day opportunity But if you want a strong game on BBO you have to......... 1) Endure abuse from your partner 2) Endure fowl play abuse from opponents, chatting out of order in foreign languages. 3) Play with a different partner or opponent almost every hand, never really completing a hand properly 4) Endure opponents abusing each other. 5) Endlessly wait for a new player to come to the table. 6) Change to a different bidding or signalling system almost every hand and sometimes even during the hand. 7) Find one player who simply plays too slow, then find another who has no tolerance at all for reasonable play. One grows so weary of the social attitudes of bridge players from around the world, why cant we just get on with the game? Lets just play, have fun, its a social game. Try new things without taking abuse because you didn't play it his or her way, and yes make silly mistakes or misjudgments without losing your partner. Unfortunately humans don't have enough tolerance for the game of bridge. Robots however are now there as such a lovely alternative. No longer do I need to endure all this abuse. Try something different....no problem see the result. Game flows beautifully, 8 hands in around 15 minutes and more time if I need. Robots wait for you, and you don't have to wait for them. No fowl play no fowl chat and even no TD ever needed, How lovely is that? However I do wish BBO would give us better partner robots for our money, Gib is very poor bidder and player by today's standards and I'm very limited to its bidding system and conventions. Come on BBO up your game please.

The solution is simple really Control Precision can include all 4441 16+ hands into the multi 2D but cueing below the single after the 2H relay. and all 4441 hands below 16 open 1D

http://tinyurl.com/y9abb8ak In which bridge dictionary is 4423 Unbalanced?

What an interesting comment. That probably explains why, although there has been improvement in tournament type, there has been a no substantial improvements in Gib robot bidding or bidding judgement. Won the world robot championship in the ninety's did they? Why do I not see Gib at this year's entry list?

The explanation there is very clear. 3 top honors 6 card suit. I don't know how Gib evaluates the contract or scores, but it doesn't take a super computer for North to calculate 9 tricks at NT if a trick is made in hearts, and no game if there is no stopper. Does Gib use Ogust? Really the best and only solution is 2 hearts inviting game at 3NT if hearts are stopped. However this is the partner,system and convention you get to endure here. Surely if you going to have a system with such a controlled bid in it like that, then you need a convention to find the right contract. The purpose of that limited opening bid of 2 diamonds was to find 3NT if available, and play in the minor if not, without overbidding. As steve says, what good does 4 diamonds help anybody? Thanks Partner.