thepossum

Hi everyone I have been playing a few ACBL individual tourneys on here and use the GiB 2/1 CC for robot tourneys obviously. However yesterday I actually read or tried to read the GCC referred to in Tourney rules. Am I alone in finding it a bit obscure in terminology in places. I am sure it is designed to allow all major conventions and systems but without intending any disrespect to ACBL its quite hard to understand and apply But I'm sure it covers most accepted CCs so not too worried. Regards P

Hi all I'm curious about this type of hand which crops up all the time. I'm familiar with most probabilities and decisions on breaks and drops vs finesses of Queen. However is there anything that drives a particular strategy for playing trumps in this configuration. Am I missing something very basic about how to play these trumps. Is there anything that indicates a strategy when you have potential finesses in either direction Note suppose there is a 7 of diamond lead, (EDIT covered by dummy) and followed by 10 in East and won by South with the Ace regards P [hv=pc=n&s=sakhkt94da54cqj97&n=s75haj75dk9862c43&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=pp1np2cp2hp4hppp]266|200[/hv]

Hi all Thanks for the comments This was the hand. Its always hard analysing afterwards when you see the cards and I obviously missed some of the considerations. On this layout 7 makes on any lead (I believe). However obviously a 2-2 trump break makes it easier and having AQxxxx clubs made it easier too, although long clubs was clearly a chance. Maybe a good player could have worked out all the possible layouts since the auction constrained things a fair bit. There was a good chance of friendly breaks in spades and diamonds. The most likely trump break would be 3-1 and the worst 4-0 outcome is fairly unlikely. However with JT9 unaccounted for I was a bit uncertain The reason I bid 3H rather than 2H is that (maybe incorrectly) I'm used to jump raises to show my hand strength ASAP but I understand 2H could have been better. 3H also shut out the possible interference but did get in the way of low level cue bids. I'm not sure how a cue bid sequence would have worked. Maybe North would bid 4H immediately and not explore cues?? Thanks again P [hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn=thepossum&s=SAT643HAKQ742D9CK&wn=Robot&w=SQJ972H63DQ5CJT73&nn=Robot&n=SHJT9DA876CAQ8652&en=Robot&e=SK85H85DKJT432C94&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=P1C(Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20%21C%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)2D(Aggressive%20weak%20jump%20overcall%20--%206+%20%21D%3B%204-10%20HCP)3H(Free%20bid%20--%20rebiddable%20%21H%3B%2015+%20total%20poi)P4H(Raise%20responder%27s%20response%20--%203+%20%21C%3B%203+%20%21H%3B%2011+%20HCP%3B%2012-16%20total%20points)P4N(Blackwood%20%5BH%5D%20--%20rebiddable%20%21H%3B%2020+%20tota)P5N(Even%20number%20of%20keycards%20and%20some%20void%20--%203+%20%21C%3B%203+%20%21H%3B%2011+%20HCP%3B%2012-16%20total%20points)P6H(rebiddable%20%21H%3B%2020+%20total%20points)PPP&p=DQDAD4D9D8DKHQD5SAS2D6S5CKC7C2C4H2H3H9H5C5C9HKC3&c=13]600|400[/hv]

Hi all I spent quite a while debating my final bid on this auction. What do you think. Also could I have explored better sooner. I really wasnt sure how to bid this hand after a 1C opening I decided after the 5NT that I had two/three losers in spades opposite a void. Partner had 11+ HCPs plus my 16. Distributional points probably 14+19 approx. I had 4 losers and partner probably 6-7. Partner had 2 aces and probably 1 queen (C or D). Also 3+ clubs to the Ace opposite my King to drop one loser on. Also only 3-4 trumps out (possibly JTxx). So I decided not to go for 7 (spade losers) and regretted it. I think I was too conservative on my trump break. Is there anything else that could have brought me down. Almost zero chance of a lead to a void in diamonds and clubs. So I had one loser I wasnt sure about but I think the percentages were with a grand bid. Interestingly nobody else bid it so it scored ok Part of the problem with the Blackwood was that I couldnt ask for Kings after 5NT regards P [hv=pc=n&s=sat643hakq742d9ck&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=p1c2d3h(15%2B%20points%205-6%2B%20hearts)p4h(3%2B%20hearts%2011%2B%20HCPs)p4np5n(2%20Key%20cards%20and%20void)p6hppp]133|200[/hv]

Thanks everyone Great advice and much appreciated regards P

Hi all Can anyone please advise on a few matchpoints strategies (and maybe also how the decisions vary in IMPs) I know there is always a large component in MPs and IMPs of trying to work out what everyone else is likely to bid with a particular hand. I've also read that the 50% chance of games is a good rule of thumb for bidding in MPs However here are a few possible scenarios You are non vulnerable versus vulnerable in a non-competitve auction. You have a (almost certainly) sure game versus small slam that you estimate is close to dependent on the position of a missing King Ignoring what everyone else does you have 50% chance of beating those in game and 50% chance of doing worse than those in game If everyone thought the same way maybe half (some arbitrary percentage P) of the people choose game and half (1-P) choose the slam You think the slam looks like a good 50% slam and go ahead and bid, go down 1 and score around 25% So clearly the assessment was incorrect. Or was it? What has been missed in the consideration? So is my 50% figure for slams incorrect. Should it be 75% and 50% for games. Ive heaard others say that the grand over small slam decision is a 75% one I would be very interested in discussion around these points, estimation of P and how these things vary between MPs and IMPs. regards P PS I know the difference is that some people may have had a way to check for the missing kings but it wasnt very easy in my auction PPS Also assume that you know your average MP percentage in this cohort - eg 55%

Dear all I was inspired to write this by another site I have a profile on where you can put your favo(u)rite bridge memory in your profile. I would be very interested in amusing, happy or traumatic anecdotes especially when things have gone wrong I have played for many years however my first experience of a "serious" bridge club was not a happy one. Back in the 90s in my late twenties, me and a friend thought we would find a local bridge club and have a few enjoyable evenings playing in a club. So we went to our local club, a very respectable area full of very respectable people. We walked into the club and asked if it was ok for us to play casually in duplicate. They said of course but the intimidation and psych games started the moment we walked in. I've never experienced such behaviour from mostly respectable middle aged people, many would have been teachers and academics Firstly people started mocking the casualness of my friends clothes (he was a student). At our first table while we were setting up the boards one of our opps mocked me for turning the board around and said "can you not read upside down" with a sneering voice. She harangued me over how long it took to fill the boards Anyway, we played a few tables, a few reasonable hands, a few disasters, going from table to table hearing the obnioxious mockery of so called respectable people. Laughing and talking - oh we havent played them yet etc with a laugh Around half way through the session it was the last of the hands at a table. My partner made a bid I didn't understand but thought was weak. My RHO asked what it meant. I said I thought it was weak. She doubled. It was strong My heart sank during the play (I was dummy) as I saw her face during the hand and understandable upset and anger She just glowered at me after the hand, not really saying anything despite me apologising profusely. Next a knew the TD had been called to our table and was involved in a discussion over it. The TD decided it was a legitimate mistake I apologised again profusely but all my RHO opp said with as much controlled anger and disdain as she could two words "Just go" So we did. We continued the session hating every minute of it. Never went back to that club. He decided he never really wanted to play in a club again. I've played a few times in a more friendly club with a more experienced partner who was given more respect than my young student friend Anyway. That was a traumatic experience. I understand the annoyance of getting an undeserved bottom but maybe if the bridge players had behaved better and the culture had been better from table one we would not have felt so nervous and prone to error. Anyway they kept their club pure. It does have a reputation for taking things a bit too seriously. However I guess the real lesson was that we should have been encouraged not to play when we arrived if that is what the group was like. It certainly put me off bridge clubs for the last 30 years. I still avoid going to them despite knowing that most are friendly places. Please think about the damage you can cause by your behaviour. It was not a world championship, just regular club bridge. Is getting upset over one hand worth discouraging people from playing the game Would love other's stories Possum

Hi all I may be stupid and I dont want to spoil people's fun but why would West lead a club against 7NTXX If we are going to have contrived hands and squeezes wouldnt it be better if they were more realistic than this one? Ive spent ages trying to work out what is so special about this. I think there are other better examples where any lead fails regards P PS I'm sure its some obscure rule with mandated plays/leads but it really is obscure and most of us have better things to do than spend time on this

Hi After more than 9 months playing and observing GiB in General IMP play and IMP and MP tournaments Im getting a little curious about something. Everyone involved in statistical modelling knows that fake variance or perterbations are added to many simulations in order to ensure that simulated means and variances are not biased. It crosses my mind observing many groups of tables that artifical variance is being added in order to give more variance in scores While over time and many tournaments, hands and simulations these things average out and give unbiased results it cn be somewhat unfair to those on the receiving end and somewhat lucky to those who are the recipients Finally everyone involved in statistics knows that in order to get unbiased results in simulations require so many simulations or replicationsthat it is essentially impossible to get statistically unbiased results. The estimators may be unbiased but there is almost certainly bias in the actual mean and variances obtained So Im asking if these methods are used in simulations, IMP general hands and IMP/MP tournaments Other users have observed that the variance between groups of tables, within groups of tables and across tournaments with very few tables is far too large I appreciate this has a desirable feature of making results on sites like this something of a lottery which some would regard as fair to all users. However given that the site is now being used for real ACBL (not BBO) masterpoints is this not a more serious matter worthy of attention to ensure high quality results in tournaments that actually give some benefit to the better players and reduce the randomness Also, an additional question. I havent studied the maths of bridge tournaments enough but given the variance between table groups in massive tournaments has anyone ever considered if any form of standardisation could be used to ensure more accurate reflection of results, based upon a variance adjustment. Im sure its very complex, since to get 100s of sets of hands to behaviour similar behaviour must be highly complex :) I would be interested in any references Just asking as an observation. Obviously these simulation and competition things have all been worked out. Im fairly new to computer tournaments :) regards P

Here we go again. The usual suspects. The three comments against me were of no help, just an attack nd you as usual just join the attack Nobody has yet made a useful comment (except part of Hrothgars if you ignore the three attacking comments)

Response 1. I'm not trying to learn from GiB. Ive been playing a long time and am trying to apply 2/1 by playing GiB which allegedly is its system Response 2. Ive been reading books on bridge bidding and play and playing for 40+ years since I was teenager/young adult Response 3. They are 2/1 or standard bids since that is the system we and GiB are using regards P

Dear all Following a few recent IMP shocks I've been analysing all sequences in a group of tables with the same hands to find out why some sequences have such massively divergent outcomes despite going via a bid with the exact same description and strength I do not know if the issue is one of understanding the complexity/precision of certain sequences in 2/1 or how GiB has coded them. However it is clear that when bidding you cannot rely solely on bid descriptions and need to bid according to system rather than how GiB describes them In a recent hand which makes 7D or 7NT many souths were left in 3NT and many received a jump to 6D by GiB after south's 3NT despite the description on the 3NT being identical in all the sequences. The issue comes down to earlier bids in auctions If you have the following sequences. North (GiB) opening the bidding, no interference EW 1. 1D-1S-2D-3N-? 2. 1D-1S-2D-3C-3D-3N-? 3. 1D-1S-2D-2H-2N-3N-? The 3NT by south is described identically in each auction. However the first two resulted in a jump to 6D and the third resulted in a pass North (GiB) had the following hand [hv=pc=n&n=s98hk9daqt86542ca]133|100[/hv] What I am curious about from both a 2/1 and GiB perspective is why sequences 1 and 2 are so different to sequence 3 regards P

Hi I'm sure others may have a more "expert" analysis than me but I agree that any normal human or bot would bid 4S under almost any criteria. I'm not a big fan of the law unless it is applied well but it should know it has 9-10+ trumps. A human law player would then compete but maybe not a bot with relatively few hcps. Maybe you could have doubled again but its risky? I also dont know how well it takes account of equal vulnerability and aspects of penalties vs contract in a competitive auction etc. Maybe its analysis showed a better chance of setting 4H than making 4S although that seems surprising. You would need a GiB simulation expert to clarify that I would also bid to 4 using losing trick count Ive been playing a lot with GiB over 8 months and it can be frustrating. However as a program it clearly cannot think flexibly like a human or (dare I say) a more advanced bot Just put it down as one of those annoying things and have an occasional rant like the rest of us regards P

Thanks Hardvector and Hrothgar Here is the full hand Sadly I didnt take the finesse with West having all the remaining hearts and holding the J trumps and went down 1 Taking the finesse gives you a chance of an overtrick if played well and playing Hrothgar's line with the diamond ruff is a safe line to make the contract if played well. Note I forgot to mention that W played low over my lead to the Ace. Clearly play of the Jack would mean to take the Ace. Thats what I wondering about "standard plays". It reminded me somewhat of some Bridge Master lessons on breaks, probabilities, and finesses I dont know how all the probabilities of breaks, distribution of points, lead possibilities (QJxx vs singleton Q) etc play out. However I clearly didnt cover all bases and didnt take the safer line of the diamonds. I dont know if the finesse is a safer line in this case on average too? Many thanks :) regards P [hv=pc=n&s=sakt92h74daq752ck&w=sj86hqj93dkjca632&n=s543hakt652d4cj85&e=sq7h8dt9863cqt974&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1c2hp2np3hp3sp4sppp]399|300[/hv] PS It should be red red

Hi all I recently had the following hand. Please dont focus on the bidding too much although 4S was a reasonable contract. I was actully planning to go to 4H but was happy to find a 5-3 spade fit. Based on results I think it was slightly better than 4H on the lay of the cards. However ironically 4S can make an overtrick, more likely to go down on the actual lie and most people's play (posted later). Most people in 4H made it but I think it can be set 1 trick How would you approach this hand after the following tricks. Im wondering if I missed a standard play or if it was unlucky break, or if I should take account of the chance of such a break and should I have taken more account of the lead of the QH :) 1 HQ led by W, won in N by KH, E followed with small heart 2 4D from N, E followed small, won by AD, W played JD 3+4 Two rounds of spades (AK) followed twice (E had Q) with the J left out after those tricks 5 ???????? I decided to play hearts to the Ace. What would you do and why? How would you plan the rest. I was playing IMPs so not really interested in overtricks, just making the contract safely Sorry I dont know how to put a partial play diagram regards P [hv=pc=n&s=sakt92h74daq752ck&n=s543hakt652d4cj85&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1c2h(Weak%206%2BH)p2n(Art%20force%2015%2B)p3hp3sp4sppp]266|200[/hv]

We are all used to the occasional unlucky or bad bid from Gib But when you get two consecutive 6D slams in an IMP missed by the Bot through no fault or skill of the souths in a group of tables that makes a total mockery of bridge and this site We play for this rubbish Bot I checked everyones bids on all the tables and there was no good reason why half the tables GiB jumped to 6D and on the other half it left people in 3NT RUBBISH

Fair enough However a large amount of the variance in bridge is chance. Things tend to average out over time. There are things you can do to sway chance your way and picking the right hand when nobody else picks it is part of bridge Occasionally someone on these forums will give me credit for a good score based upon good reasoning rather than sour grapes This place is full of self appointed experts, probably mostly average players who think because this is the n/b forum that people asking things or posting things don't know what they are doing, talking about or how to play the game If I had world class or expert against my name, or was a famous player, or someone with thousands of points everyone would be grovelling at the quality of the bid Do you know how many so called expert and world class players were languishing on 2C+3

Thanks everyone P

Hi all Here is the full hand. How would competent opps have interfered after 1H and how would a better south than me have approached this auction. I understand that everyone will say this is GiB's limitations. Note there was one other south (an "expert") who bid the exact same auction as me so I didnt feel totally lucky However I genuinely feel on all assessments that my hand is stronger than everyone is saying and that it is (almost) worthy of 2C on the distributional 9 trick criteria, if not points. It also only has 3 losers Anyway, sometimes you have to take a risk in tourneys to get some IMPs (especially after two unlucky hands) and I feel this was legitimate without exagerrating the strength of my hand "grossly" regards P [hv=pc=n&s=s2hk97432dcakqj74&w=s75hj85daq8752c95&n=sjt43hqdkj964ct86&e=sakq986hat6dt3c32]399|300[/hv]

So how do I show a hand like that after 1H-P-1S If I feel there is good chance of game regards P

My bid is strong and forcing and I thought my hand is enough to force to game. One of the requirements for 2C is having 9 tricks. I have 9 in either clubs or hearts and a self-sufficient club suit no? I know there is a small risk of up to 2 down doubled vulnerable You need to force surely and not risk being passed at 2 level I dont know what I would have bid after 4S, probably passed. It would have gone down 2. The hand has some defensive credentials?? Hearts doesnt get to game (-1) and NT is a no hoper I accept it is maybe at the more questionnable end of game force bids but ....

Dear all I had no idea about how to bid this in a recent IMPs tourney. I figured I had 9(.5) tricks and enough to justify 2C but wasnt sure how happy anyone else would be. How else could you bid and force this to ensure you ended in the right game (or even slam). Which was 5C. Would you be upset in duplicate with another table bidding this The alternative sequences started 1H-P-1S-P-? regards P [hv=pc=n&s=s2hk97432dcakqj74&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=2cp2d2s3hp3np4cp4dp5cppp]133|200[/hv] PS I was in serious need of points having made a miss click cue bid on an earlier hand causing me to miss an easy game and also missing another game by only bidding to 3. So I needed to be less cautious

The other aspect of bidding though which many players seem to forget (reading various sites and observing play) is that it is about accurate communication to opponents and partner. If a convention says balanced or semi balanced without singleton except in very rare cases it could qualify as a misleading or unusual bid if not alerted or on the CC This is clear from the above discussion where several good players would have chosen a major attack on the basis of the bid. And with a 4531 hand there is a perfectly acceptable and accurate major bid available with a reverse. You can also reverse minor major with a 4441 with 20 points and also 15-17 I'm concerned that many in the game don't seem to care about this anymore

Dear all I occasionally fall into a trap with the following sequence and hand types when many people seem confident to bid to 3 NT without a stopper in a suit. This seems rather risky to me. Should south bid 3S showing a stopper. How do most 2/1 players as for stoppers and how does GiB do it. Most people with this seem to just take the plunge with a points based 3NT bid and risk not having a heart stopper but I would like to be more sure [hv=pc=n&s=saq76h654dt5ckt96&n=s42ha9dakq632cqj5&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1d(3%2B%20D%2011-21)p1s(4%2B%20S%206%2B%20pts)p3d(6%2B%20D%2017-20%20pts)p]266|200[/hv]

Thanks everyone for all the thoughtful replies and reasoning Will bear it in mind for future leads against NT and also the chance that someone has a distorted bid I'm curious about thoughts on 2NT with a singleton. It seems quite a heated topic. Official bidding systems (from my reading) suggest that it is occasionally ok if you have an Ace (or possibly a King) singleton. I think a Jack singleton is pushing it a bit :) I know its more acceptable than 1NT with a singleton I may even start being more flexible with my 2NT bids myself regards P