thepossum

Please disregard any reputation points I gave above. I tried to undo one that I believe was incorrect. I agree in principle with what most people are saying but the issue is far too complex to address on a forum and I'm too tired Suffice to say I trust that the hands are suitably random, whatever randomness means :)

Hi there Is it possible to undo a reputation point when you realise what someone says is incorrect :) Thanks P

I was wondering about pros and cons of 1♠ vs 2♣. I feel sometimes that the game force restricts opportunity later (although I dont want to risk being left in 1♠) if partner has nothing. How would you decide on which strong hands to use 2♣ vs 1♠. This one fitted my criteria for 2C. I tend to use it a bit light on points sometimes if I feel the losers/shape looks good :)

Thanks all :) I wasn't too upset after the initial reaction(seeing the extra Ace) and thinking about it. Probably well judged by North :) The IMPs just stung a little :( I was disappointed we didnt go through cues a bit. Seems a few in the know found a way to be the blackwood asker rather than North ;)

.... should/could I have done something better to get closer to grand or is this a reasonable contract given NS hands. If I had been asking as south I think I would have asked for kings and possibly gone to grand on my singleton club. Sadly North didnt know [hv=pc=n&s=sakq52hak93dat7cj&n=s8763ht2dk2caq743&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=2cp3c(5%2B%20C%20KQ%20C%2C%208%2B%20TP)p3sp4n(Blackwood)p5d(4%20keys)p5h(%3F%20queen)p6h(Q%20and%20K%20H)p6sppp]266|200[/hv]

Hi all Is it possible to edit and post partial play diagrams - eg for endgames. Ive tried reading various threads and searching but cant find anything yet regards P EDIT Note the answer is partly yes but trying to play with the below diagram :) Please bear with me [hv=pc=n&s=s432hadkc&n=saj9hqdjc&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1np6nppp]266|200[/hv] Cards outstanding are as follows S: KQT87 H: T96 D: T9 C: Not known yet which of EW has them. S to lead needing to lose just one trick Opening lead was 8C from three small East has so far discarded two small spades and West a small diamond Note. This is based on one of the Intermediate Bridge Masters. Hope its ok using it as an example (I will delete it if its not ok). I'm interested in how bridge solvers (and me) deal with them but also how to post partials Note 2. That was based on the following string h[v=pc=n&s=s432hadkc&n=saj9hqdjc&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1np6nppp]266|200[/hv] "h" and opening bracket have been swapped to allow me to post the string

I did say it wasnt the top lead :) Ace diamonds first Clubs next Then the rest fairly equal with not much chance of any setting the contract. But it was a 5 minute back of the envelope sim. I'm not in the sim business and dont pretend to be :) All I said was that it is seems to be the way the bot plays with an uneven trump break to try to give trump control to partner. I have noticed it before Note. Here are the chances of making 4+ tricks (almost 0). I just reran it and it given there is so little difference it has a slightly different order :) The above results were relating to average tricks, not setting the contract :) Spade 0.056 Club 0.054 Ace D 0.05 KH 0.044 Small D 0.043 95% CI Approx +-0.012 Edit For completeness this is the lead order to maximise expected number of tricks Average number of tricks maximised by leading Ace D Ace D 1.91 tricks Small C 1.69 tricks QC 1.66 tricks Spade 1.65 tricks K H 1.59 tricks Small D 1.58 tricks 95%CI Approx +- 0.07 But as I said it was a 5 minute (3 to write and 2 to run) basic script and 1000 deals using bdeal. Nothing fancy in the script at all. Just a few constraints and double dummy :) I don't spend much time looking at sims although simulating leads is fun to compare with expert theory. I don't have much time left to explore that. I'm more interested in the statistical theory and game theory of competitive bridge - but I hasten to add I am a disinterested amateur, unafiliated to anyone other than myself and my (almost retired) business is not related to bridge in any way. This is a nice relaxing way for me to keep my mind active in the absence of (lack of motivation to chase any) serious contracts :)

Yes :) I'm getting used to the leads by now and it usually shows a bad break Just thinking about it though. Its not a bad lead on the hands and given the auction. The auction suggested that trumps could be a good lead and it potentially denied a ruff and promoted a trump control for West? Maybe someone can comment. Trump leading is not my strength. I know its recommended if you are trying to deny a ruff and think their may be difficuties making the contract. Is it not a good lead. Its quite an attacking lead yes?? Maybe it was the least worst lead. Double dummy gives no difference in any leads - I just checked. I know it takes away a possible lost trick on a finesse but surely it has some merits. Hopefully someone can explain PS I just ran a quick sim and there isnt much chance of setting the contract. Ace diamonds (then clubs) came up as best lead (in terms of average tricks) but there isnt much difference between the rest. What do all the experts say?

Hi, Recently playing IMPs I had what seemed to be (and was) a perfectly fitting hand with 5-3 in both majors and 3-2 in both minors. How do you proceed and evaluate options after the following start. Would it be different at MPs [HV=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|thepossum,~Mwest,~Mnorth,~Meast|md|3SAJ852HA73DJ4CAJT,S763HJT82DK972C52,SKQ4HQ9654DQT8CK9,ST9HKDA653CQ87643|sv|o|rh||ah|Board%201|mb|1H|an|Major%20suit%20opening%20--%205+%20!H;%2011-21%20HCP;%2012-22%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|1S|an|One%20over%20one%20--%204+%20!S;%206+%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|1N|an|2-3%20!C;%202-3%20!D;%205%20!H;%202-3%20!S;%2012-14%20HCP|mb|P|mb|4H|an|3+%20!H;%204+%20!S;%2012+%20HCP;%2013-16%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|HK|pc|HA|pc|H8|pc|H4|pc|CT|pc|C2|pc|CK|pc|C8|pc|C9|pc|C7|pc|CA|pc|C5|pc|H3|pc|HT|pc|HQ|pc|D6|pc|SK|pc|ST|pc|S2|pc|S3|pc|H9|pc|C6|pc|H7|pc|HJ|pc|D2|pc|D8|pc|DA|pc|D4|pc|D5|pc|DJ|pc|DK|pc|DT|pc|D9|pc|DQ|pc|D3|pc|S5|pc|H5|pc|C4|pc|CJ|pc|H2|pc|SQ|pc|S9|pc|S8|pc|S7|mc|10|]600|400[/HV] This was my auction but I wanted to explore more after 1NT and was a bit unsure of all the bids available to find best choice of major or NT. For example the spades are stronger than hearts. Please ignore EW hands

The confirmation option is good, both on bidding and play. The problem I found is that after a while the double click becomes so automatic I still make occasional errors. I would possibly consider (if I were the developers :) ) a (small) delay between bids to allow an undo prior to the bid being submitted. But I have no idea how long a delay is reasonable, there is so mcuh variation in speed of internet connections, speed of computers and differences between browsers that I dont really know how it could be done. It could also be regarded as unfair in favouring people with faster reaction times. So I think I'm coming back to thinking that the bid and card play confirmation is a good and fair option that covers many bases. Everyone needs to be made aware of it. Maybe it could be a default and have to be switched off :) PS However I know its impossible to stop all errors without runining the experience and the game :)

Thanks everyone for the comments I'm still rather confused about the use of the game tries. Reading about them there seem to be so many possible meanings - long, short and help - that its a bit unclear how this was being used and the response and infuence on leads From my feeling about the hand with Jxx hearts that definitely/could have been asking for help - then with 2 losers and a decent point count N went to game, but with fewer points would have signed off in 3? If it was a help bid and interepeted as such by GiB then I would have thought and my own sims show that a small heart lead gives the best chance. However if you assume that the heart bid shows higher honours Q+ then a diamond or other lead is just as good What confuses me is that I would assume all the bots to interpret the bid in the same way :) Maybe I dont understand them well enough but from what I can see they can be used for almost anything :)

ok then, given there seems confusion about the meaning of the bid in GiB land and the bid doesnt necessarily represent the expectation of the heart suit. Also given that only one table went via that route and bid to slam. All other tables, including me, assessed the hand as a game hand and ended in 4S or 3NT. I thought there were too many losers and after seeing the final hand I thought it was somewhat lucky making slam on a non heart lead [hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|thepossum,~Mwest,~Mnorth,~Meast|md|3SAJ82HJ43DAK73CK2,S943HK9865D94C754,SKQ65HQ7DJ5CAQJT6,ST7HAT2DQT862C983|sv|o|rh||ah|Board%201|mb|1C|an|Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20!C;%2011-21%20HCP;%2012-22%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|1S|an|One%20over%20one%20--%204+%20!S;%206+%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|2S|an|Simple%20raise%20--%203+%20!C;%204%20!S;%2011+%20HCP;%2012-15%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|4S|an|4+%20!S;%2012+%20HCP;%2013-18%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|D9|pc|DJ|pc|DQ|pc|DK|pc|S2|pc|S4|pc|SQ|pc|S7|pc|D5|pc|DT|pc|DA|pc|D4|pc|D3|pc|C4|pc|S5|pc|D6|pc|S6|pc|ST|pc|SJ|pc|S3|pc|D7|pc|C7|pc|SK|pc|D8|pc|C6|pc|C8|pc|CK|pc|C5|pc|SA|pc|S9|pc|H7|pc|C9|pc|C2|pc|H5|pc|CA|pc|C3|mc|13|]600|400[/hv] All I'm trying to understand is whether the 3H bid was a valid option. I dont really understand game tries but didnt really think of anything other than game and didnt feel that showing an additional suit was necessary. However the person who took the chance made on a (for me) lucky lead

This is part of where I do not really understand parts of this bidding system we are using. I'm not really familiar with the concept of "game try" bids. I understand bidding a second suit to give a choice or maybe options of no trumps. But I'm am assuming it means that they need help based on my knowledge of the hand :) However the definition given of the 3H bid after the 1S bid is as follows: Game try suit: 3+ H, 4+ S, 10+ HCP, 11+ TPs, Forcing This is what the GiB notes say "Two-way Game Tries After a single raise of a major suit, GIB plays two-way game tries. The next step (1♥-2♥-2♠, 1♠-2♠-2NT) is a short-suit game try, showing unspecified shortness. Responder can bid the next step above that (2NT or 3♣) to ask where the shortness is. Opener bids the short suit, or bids his major if the short suit is one of the step suits. Any other bid below 3 of the major is a long suit game try, at least a 3-card suit with some honors. After 1♥-2♥, 2NT is a LSGT in spades (since 2♠ would be a short-suit game try). 3 of the major is a general strength game try, showing about 17 points with no singleton or void (GIB rarely makes this bid, since this would probably be a 1NT opener)." and this is how I understand responses to game tries (from BridgeBum) "After hearing a help suit game try, responder should bid game with 0 - 1.5 losers in the suit. (In other words, a first or second round control.) With 2 - 2.5 losers, responder must exercise judgement. And with 3 losers (e.g. a worthless tripleton), responder should sign off in 3/." And without wanting to influence the lead discussion, hoping everyone can abstract themselves, but only one table bid it (out of a group of30+ players including Experts and Advanced players). I did consider it as one of several possible bids but it was not the obvious or most likely choice of bids PS We were playing IMPs PPS From my ordinary level of bridge, thinking about the lead and what the auction means there is really only one lead likely to bring down the slam. But I'm biased by knowing the hand. If dummy has cover for the king then there is no real chance since you cant get two diamond tricks (based on HCPs). The only hope is that partner has Ace hearts??? Or am I missing an option (like partner having Q hearts and an Ace?). MAybe its all very borderline but I dont feel going to slam was justified unless declarer knows what the lead is going to be. By the way, it was perfectly legitimate bidding (just) so I'm not suggesting anything untoward but......North only gives a simple raise and when I show the hands South doesnt have that strong a hand

Hi all I was declarer on this hand in a tourney. This is not my auction but could have been. What would you lead. Only S is human regards P [hv=pc=n&w=s943hk9865d94c754&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1cp1sp2sp3h(Game%20Try)p4sp4n(Blackwood)p5s(2%20or%205%20keys%20and%20the%20Queen)p6sppp]133|200[/hv]

The problem I have with many of the current approaches to algorithmic data science for issues as important as detecting cheating are that they need to be open, explainable and not highly prone to error. The level of predictive capacity of many statistical methods would need very careful use to avoid risk of tarnishing people's reputations, or alternatively tarnishing the reputation of those who use them. Combination of analytics and expert systems maybe provides some hope, since expert system approaches have been successfully used in legal and explanation and argument applications. There is a rather alarming tendency in the world for very import decisions to be taken out of hands of experts, for people who do not understand statistical limitations to overuse things, and for potential massive injustice. I'm particularly concerned about this is anything involving law, policy, access to benefits etc., but alleged cheating bridge is clearly a place where justice is essential. We risk, in this world, losing understanding, explanation, due process etc. under the recent trend towards predictive capacity I will certainly look out for the book. I have been trying to find any quality published statistical theory on bridge analysis - that is beyond the basic stuff we usually all think of as bridge statistics. I would be interested in any pointers to quality theory and writing on the very complex issue of competitive bridge. It strikes me, after less than 12 months thinking about it, that the nature of the game, tournaments, the sources of variance/error, the data/information requirements are massive. Will follow this with interest. I am rather concerned by a few things you describe hrothgar. Many algorithmic approaches are seriously flawed if the approach to training is flawed and end up with entrenched biases and injustices - especially using other people (possiblly competitors) beliefs about cheating. From my knowledge, so far, I have not seen the theory clearly enough expounded to even start analysing it in this way. Also, understanding how much data and analysis would be required to prove in a alegal or quasi legal sense Very interested in your future posts :)

Thanks for ruining another of my threads with your obnoxious unnecessarily rude personal attacks If you had bothered to even read my thread and look at my auction you would have noticed that I made the correct decision and stopped in 5S What an obnoxious piece of ***** you are johnu. You and a bunch of others on this site My thread was asking about options on how to explore slam with that hand. Some people had the politeness and decency to address my question instead of being a totally obnoxious **** Never comment on my threads again please I've been standing up to the bullies on this site for a year now and I will continue to do it whenever one of you dares to show your faces on my threads or at my tables.

Hi all I recently had this hand as responder playing IMPs white vs white, opposite a 1 Spade opener. How do people feel about the best ways to progress with this. We have a total of 32+ points and despite my hand being flat few enough losers to consider slam in spades or NT. I wasnt sure how to progress and bid Blackwood immediately, receiving a 5D response and debated on going to 6NT or 6S missing possibly two aces, but decided to sign off in 5S+1 Sure enough 6S and 6NT make since we had the Ace of Spades. Other options I considered were Jacoby 2NT when opener follows up with 3D (short diamonds) then cue bids etc. However as far as I understand the cue bids it is hard for North to show its Ace of spades without it being a sign off How would you evaluate this hand and chances of slam and what do you think are the best ways to bid and the best chance contract. I know I was being a bit cautious and on another day would have taken a chance on 6NT or 6S. Is the chance of 6 high enough at IMPs to take the chance It was definitely one that got away regards P [hv=pc=n&s=sq762haq72dakqckj&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1sp4n(Blackwood)p5d(1%20keycard)p5sppp]133|200[/hv] PPS Undeleted. Sorry

Dear all Thankyou all for your comments and knowing that my indecision wasnt too wrong. I think everyone assessed it perfectly. Defending was certainly a good option provided you could do it successfully - sadly I was one of a group that made an error in defence and scored badly. What I didn't mention in the original post is that I am more comfortable declaring or being the defensive leader than being the receiver of first lead - I still don't understand the Bots leads properly and am more likely to make errors. It needed good defence (well better than me :) ) Here are the four hands. Partner (Gib) led 4C, dummy played low and I won with the King. I attacked spades when there were two diamond tricks. I should have switched to diamonds after the QUeen from West but was on autopilot and sadly missed the opportunity, either that or I thought it may have had QJ doubleton - cant remember my thoughts - and I'm not sure when it plays high or low of equals. I just wasnt expecting partner to have 5 spades [hv=pc=n&s=sak762h5dkt86ck62&w=sqhkqjt42dq954cqt&n=sjt843h87da73c854&e=s95ha963dj2caj973]399|300[/hv] Double dummy suggested that both contracts should set by 1 trick In terms of scores in the group I was in 4S scored 100% - not sure how they managed it - sorry just checked, it was transferred to North by a World Class player :), not played by South 4H-1 scored 98% 4S-1 scored 80% 4S-2 scored 40% 4H scored 8% - sadly this was me. I wasnt good enough to set it

Hi I don't know if this is really a difficult enough decision. However I wasn't sure, playing MPs whether to Pass or try game. We have 8+ trumps and using my (please be kind) favoured LTC approach few enough losers that I would consider 3S in the absence of competition EW have 9+ trumps So using my less favored LOTT that gives 17+ total tricks competing to the game level White vs red. I decided to pass, how would you evaluate it at MPs in a Free BBO tournament, not an advanced club tourney :) regards P [hv=pc=n&s=sak762h5dkt86ck62&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=1s2h2s4h]133|200[/hv]

It raises an interesting question for the non-tournament use. I know non-tournament hands dont mean that much but I have occasionally noticed differences in play on regular IMP casual play that I wondered if they were down to Advanced vs Basic bots - eg with seemingly identical auctions and play by declarer, having different leads or plays from time to time. I havent been able to pin it down though If we do compare against people in regular IMP play with different bots it then begs the question whether partnering a basic bot against two basic bots is better or worse than partnering an advanced bot against two advanced bots :)

Says he is not one of the people to have attacked me personally (which you werent, except on a couple of occasions) and continues with a multi-sentence, multi paragraph, personal attack, insults and abuse, totaly uncalled from the so-called self-proclaimed top player you are. Ive spent my life working with the top people in many fields. Generally the better people are at what they do, the less they need to be rude and abusive, since they develop humility and understand their limitations - not always true I understand - some still tend to have an unnecessary insecurity and attack and bully their subordinates I appreciate your expertise/knowledge on IMPs/MPs but dont have much respect for your behaviour towards me personally on occasions or some of the other unnecessarily rude and abusive players on this site. It seems to me like a totally unnecesary attack. I could waste a lot of my valuable time and address each individual part of your attack word by word, sentence by sentence but to be honest I'm fed up with it. All I can assume is that you are one of those so immersed in your little subculture of arroagance, insults, rudeness that you dont even know when you are doing it I'm putting all previous interactions down to a cultural misunderstanding. I now realise that you and many others never learned anything other than rudeness, insults and arrogance. You seem to think that is what passes for constructive criticism. However I understand it now. If you are so immersed in it you will never be aware of doing it, nor will those who are so insecure they feel they have to grovel at a self-professed experts feet. But thanks for the comments on IMPs/MPs and all your comments and knowledge of bridge on the forums. They would be worthy of respect if they didnt come after such an unnecessarily incorrect rude and personal attack. May I add you are also totally ignorant about me, my bridge level, my knowledge and experience I never attacked you. I never attack anyone except in self-defence and sadly, despite me using an alias, I am ethically obliged to point out when I have been misrepresented in any way in public. But I do agree with you about the level of play on BBO on average. otherwise I would not not do nearly as well as I do (despite me playiing an alien US style convention - I'm most comfortable with basic Acol -, and competing against people who like to openly - they brag about it - cheat the dumb bots and flout the rules of Bridge; and also lie about their expertise - bridge base rankings are meaningless and seemingly the site/business esists largely to give ordinary ACBL players an easy way of buying cheap and easy masterpoints - BBO points mean nothing). I also agree that Robot bridge is no test of true Bridge ability, despite many who think it is. Most of the tournaments are best hand - that isnt even bridge. You have tooltips explaining bids - that isnt bridge. If BBO players were as good as they claim (on average) how is it possible for me to win ACBL duplicate tourneys without cheating the bots. I agree robot bridge is no real test of bridge ability. Nothing substitutes for the requirements of face to face club/tournament bridge - all the skill, memory, knowledge, psychology, stress, pressure etc is lost. Your worst misrepresentation of me was my lack of knowledge and what constitutes a top player. I started learning when I was in my teens over 40 years ago from a very good player and spent a fair bit of my youth learning how to play from watching and reading people such as Bob Hamman and Zia Mahmood. Maybe you have heard of them. I think I know what a top player is. I havent heard of you despite the way you brag about being in the Bermuda Bowl (did you win it?) and kibitizng a few world class players. Also, what upset me most in the early days on this forum (less so recently) is the way "good", "expert" or "top" players insult and abused people on the noivce and beginner forum of all players. You were one the offenders in that Mike which is why I was upset with you in the first place. It was like Serena Williams going to a local club childrens tennis tournament and telling the children how useless they are, and shouting at them from the side of the court. Its rather childish Mike whoever you are Finally, and this doesnt apply to you since I have never sat at your table in Bridge, almost every time I have tried to host a table, play at a table, or kibitz a table on BBO I have observed or been subject to incredible rudeness and ignorance by people who probably arent very good. Most of them are so ignorant they dont even allow you time to discuss conventions with your partner when you sit down, to ask the meaning of bids, to announce and alert bids. Most of them dont even know the rules, values or ethics of bridge, let alone have the right to abuse and insult someone who does. There are even occasional threads on the more advanced forums from so-called "experts" about how to cheat at Bridge and get around the rules. There is a total culture of rudeness, and it seems to have been encouraged and/or condoned by senior plays such that it is now the norm and seems accepted. It is disgusting having players insult attack and abuse players at a table. I'm not talking aboout tournaments - these are meaningless casual games in the BBO club. Normal common decency and behaviour or human beings is not to be rude, obnixous and insutling to strangers. If you want a top game play people you know but dont insult people who come to a site to play a friendly game and get abused. OK. Ive faced that disgusting behaviour and rudeness in clubs face to face and more so here. It is obnoxious and unnecesary. The whole place and the whole game seems to have been taken over by a poker- style mentality. Poker is a different game. Sadly many playing bridge here dont seem to realise that. I'm quite an anarchist and libertarian myself but even under anarchy the whole point of a game is that it has rules. If people cheat at a game then their success is meaningless and everyone knows that. That goes for academia, bridge, business everything - although increase in anything goes, cheating and reduction in overall quality is prevalent in all parts of the world. Those who win by cheating can sit and think they were successful but only in their heads (which for some is enough I guess). Noboby else respects them, except maybe other cheats. I would be interested tho know if the ACBL/NABC/BBO have done anything to address the widespread cheating that polluted the last NABC Robot tournaments But thanks again for all your comments on IMPs/MPs and all your comments and knowledge and expertise of bridge on the forums. That is certainly worthy of respect. I never denied you that despite having to put up with your rudeness. Cheers P

Possum Sim doesnt find much difference between C,D,H leads with diamonds being very slightly higher average EW tricks but Clubs being very slightly best chance of 3+ tricks. However not really very statistically different Best chance of 1+ tricks -> diamond lead Best chance of 2+tricks -> lead heart Best chance of 3+tricks (small) -> lead club Best chance of 4+ tricks -> you dont have much chance Average number of tricks approximately 1 irrespective of C,D,H Dont lead a spade Possums also try not to use UI when playing bridge so that was not simulated They also tend to be very late to parties and try not to look at solutions before answering questions :)

Hi all Very curious. There are forums for novice-beginner, intermediate-advanced and expert on this site. Despite having played for many years and regarding myself as reasonably good intermediate I have regularly posted queries and hands that I think fit in the beginner-novice category though many I accept are more advanced. However regularly I see posts and replies that are well beyond beginner-novice. Conversely I often see fairly basic stuff on more advanced forums. I'm a big fan of total anarchy, disregard of rules, categories, structures and boxes but any novice-beginner on top of everything posted on this forum would be a very good player Have a good night or day depending on your location in the world P

thx everyone

Depending on context, tournament, vulnerability and mood I would consider Stayman 2C etc There is possible game But I'm no expert :)