carmelbobc

Do not understand why GIB cannot give a hi-lo discard sequence to show a doubleton. On a recent board, with 5 - 2, GIB—in following to my opening lead—played the 2 first and then the 5. I missed giving it a ruff for a much better board.

Yesterday, playing a "Just Declare Game," it never stopped! I finally quit when I got to Board 28!

20220919_133314.jpeg I do not see how to attach a file. If the above photo does not work, here is a link My link Note that I was down 3, vulnerable, and was scored at -200, not -300.

On this board, I think N should have bid something—not passed: SOS Redouble How does GIB play a XX in this situation?

I have raised this issue before. Using "10" rather than "T" in hand layouts can cause one to think they have a 6-card suit: 76 Q J8654 J10754 https://u.pcloud.link/publink/show?code=XZJmhFXZJ7I9vsXwJL5vSetEuqh2y8TrjvM7 Moreover, the ten is an honor card, and all other honor cards are letters. Yes, the ten can go either way, but T would be so much clearer. 76 Q J8654 JT754 So much better. Just because it always has been done that way does not make it better. Curious what others think. CarmelBobC

GIB plays an opening 2-level bid in Passout seat as preemptive. That is not how it generally is played because who are you preempting in the passout seat?? This from Robin's Bridge Blog, with which Larry Cohen agrees: "There's fairly uniform agreement on what kind of a hand 2♥ or 2♠ shows after three passes: it's kind of an intermediate two-bid: a good six-card suit and somewhere in the 9-13 hcp range. In other words, either a maximum weak two or a minimum opener. The logic is easy: You have, say, 11 hcp which leaves 29 for the other players. You already know that none of them has an opening bid. Most probably they have 9 or 10 points each. Between them, they have 7 spades so that's 2 or 3 each on average. If partner has 9 with two pieces in support, you will typically be able to make 2♠ and the opponents, remember each of them has already passed, will be loathe to come in at the three-level. Preemption with a good expectation of making. What could be better?"

A much better partnership agreement regarding responding to a strong 2C opening is one recommended by Mike Lawrence and now being used by many players. It avoids the vague 2D "waiting" first response, and is very simple to remember and use: • 2D shows 4 or more HCP. If direct seat interferes, X or XX shows 4 or more HCP. • 2H shows 3 or less HCP. If direct seat interferes, Pass shows 3 or less HCP. Opener now knows immediately whether or not there is game/slam or just a partscore. If responder bids 2H and opener has hearts, they can pass and often get a good board playing at the 2-level where those playing 2D=Waiting, where it showed weakness, ended up at the 3-level going down one. If opener bids, it is forcing to 2NT or 3 of opener's suit.

Other things being equal, how should you play: Txx opposite AKJxx I first played to the A, both opponents following low. Then back to my hand and led the T. W played the 9. What next and why? Thanks, CarmelBobC

I'm certainly not an expert BBO player. But often I'm confused in reviewing a board when GIB's opening lead is the same for all players, yet its follow-up leads vary for reasons I cannot surmise. Example: In the ACBL Daylong (MP) A -2019-10-10 Board#2. With the bidding the same for all players, S ends up declaring 4H: - GIB's opening lead in all cases was the D4. E plays its singleton D, and NS wins the trick. - If NS takes the CA and then lead hearts, W wins the HA and plays a diamond for E to ruff. - But, when NS next leads hearts (trumps), W wins the HA but returns a club, which lets S make as many as 6H. Very much will appreciate someone enlightening me as to how GIB decides it second lead after the opening lead. CarmelBobC

Because BBO plays 2/1 game forcing and Inverted Minors, I suggest that BBO should play the Invitational Jump Shift by responder rather than the strong (Soloway) jump shift. The reason being that responder can always ensure that game or slam will be reached without first using up valuable bidding space. An IJS shows 9-11 HCP, a decent 6+ suit, and no side 4-card major. It can be bid with or without competition, that is, over an interfering takeout double or overcall. It denies support for partner's suit – major or minor. Because opener can pass an IJS, using it often enables reaching a good part score or otherwise difficult to bid NT game. Larry Cohen, for one, recommends playing it as does Eric Rodwell. In an interview about why he does not play Bergen Raises, Rodwell said, "...these artificial three-level jumps mean I can't make an Invitational Jump Shift, which is what I like to play." Responder's jump shift can be played four ways: preemptive, invitational, strong, or artificial. Although popular at the club level, the preemptive jump shift seldom deters modern players and ends up giving the opponents a roadmap for declaring the hand. And, as stated above, playing 2/1 game forcing and Inverted Minors pretty much eliminates responder's need for the strong jump shift.

Excellent advice. Thank you. Question: Might there be a way in which GIB can perform that simulation as soon as S views how a double will be interpreted? Or, give S an option to indicate that he wants the double to be for penalty? By the way, when I click to "Reply," I do not see a panel in which to do so. So, I'm just adding my reply here.

Excellent advice. Thank you. Question: Might there be a way in which GIB can perform that simulation as soon as S views how a double will be interpreted? Or, give S an option to indicate that he wants the double to be for penalty? By the way, when I click to "Reply," I do not see a panel in which to do so. So, I'm just adding my reply here.

Thank you so very much, Stephen. I learned a lot from your post; it really makes sense. And, I have a renewed respect for my BOT partners! On that board, had I followed the old adage to return partner's opening lead, we would have set them and scored very well. I suggest BBO include your description of how the BOTs decide whether a double is takeout or not in its materials.

GIB passes obvious TOD after RHO opens a weak 2H, which responder raises to 3H. Here is the board: https://tinyurl.com/y5k3xn24 To add salt to the wound, GIB then makes the only lead that allows the opponents to make! Very much will appreciate someone telling me why. Certainly seems like a bug to me!

Something is amiss in playing NABC Day 2 practice game. I played yesterday, so am eligible to play today. Yet, what I click to play the game, the table flashes for a moment and, then, I get the message: "Unable to join table. An error has occurred." This has been going on for over an hour. Anyone else having an issue?? CarmelBobC

I would like to retain Josh at some hourly rate to work with me to improve my play with/against the BOTs. How can we connect to discuss?

I had the same issue and had many exchanges with BBO support about it. Wish I could recall exactly how I resolved it. The best I can determine is that BBO has both a desktop and mobile version of the software. When I first logged in, I got the Mobile version - which behaved as you describe. Eventually, by logging in from my iMac, I got - and locked into - the version that you and I prefer. Good luck!

I had this same issue for months. I, too, like to view "left to right." The new program had the History on the left and the board on the right. And, it was not easy to use GIB. After many email exchanges with BBO support, here's what I'm pretty sure was going on. If you originally logged in with a somewhat small browser window, the program thinks you are on a mobile device and defaults to that version of the new program. I'm not sure how I fixed it, but I think what I did was start fresh by accessing BBO from its website with a large browser window (that was the only way in which I could get the option to try the new program). When I clicked to do so, everything was as I like it. AND, the new program is a big improvement. If this works for you, please do me a favor: I have requested that BBO us "T" rather than "10" in showing a hand. This way, all the suits line up nicely. That is, a suit with a "10" does not look longer than a similarly length suit without a "10." Some bridge websites already do this, and it looks much better (for example, "skybridgeclub.com). After all, a T is an honor card just like an A, K, Q, or J.

Here's a simple way in which to calculate odds like this. It is called the "indirect" method. You start with the probability that the suit will break 3-3, which is 0.355. The probability that it WON'T break 3-3 is 1.000 - 0.355, or 0.645. This probability includes it breaking 4-2, 5-1, or 6-0. The probability that BOTH suits do not break 3-3 is 0.645 x 0.645, or 0.416. So the probability that AT LEAST ONE SUIT will break 3-3 is 1.00 - 0.416, or 0.584. In your case, with three 7-card suits, the probability of at least one of them breaking 3-3 is 1.00 - (0.645 x 0.645 x 0.645) or 0.732.

Please click this: https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZ8bB27ZtCujsuSXj4LmY1R48EwlOk8lTXoV To see what to me was an unfounded GIB pass of what it should have recognized as a takeout double.

GIB cost me big on Board #5 in the NABC practice round Sunday: [hv=pc=n&s=saqj72h753dkqj6c6&w=s65hqt94d7532ct94&n=skhkj8dat4cj8732&e=shdc]399|300|N opened 1C. E overcalled 1S passed around to N, which doubled. That was passed out.[/hv] I led my singleton C6. When N got in with the SK, GIB led the C7 for my ruff. So, I returned my H5 - having read the C7 as suit preference for hearts. GIB should have led the C2, showing preference for diamonds. Because GIB "knew" it might be giving me a ruff - or did it(?) - seems it would be an easy fix to incorporate its giving suit preference in this situation.