pigpenz

you got to browse down all the sections to find best rewards....but disappointingly I would have thought it would pay more for the top ten

I am sort of suprised that there has not been any discussion of the ruling giving the BRibbon to Grue Levin here. I was just curious, it has been flogged to death on bridgewinners.

belive me I tried it all ways, thought maybe i had been compromised finnaly just changed the password thanks

had never changed my password could log onto bbo to play bridge but couldn't log onto forums with the same password. what would cause that as they were both the same. had to log onto bbo and change password to log onto forums? seemed sort of strange to have to do that.

it is interesting that people have all of these gadgets for competing against 1NT a lot of club players have nothing against a strong 2♣

northern California has this breed of players that learned to open 2♣with 4 loser hand, but a lot the hands there that people open 2♣dont even begin to have a play for 9 tricks when they do it on two suiters. so for most of the people defending it, the best is to bid and a great majority of the times the hand belongs to the non opening 2♣side. A great majority of people in the norcal area play this way and have been doing this for 40 yrs, so I am suprised the Joan hasn't run into this before in the Chico Redding area.

from looking at hands generated, there is only about a 20% chance of beating 1NT so we are looking at the safest lead to hold 1NT to making(matchpoints)

I guess they could add something that allows one to see what the ips are for the people. a lot of login boards shows peoples ips.

so using your assumptions for the hands 3♣-23.60% 7♣-23.60% 5♥-19.50% k♣-18.90% Q♠-18.70% 7♥-18.70% 5♠-18.10% then drop off to 16%-10% for rest on another layout the winning lead was the Phil-GIB Q♠ LOL

I set up constraints for what I thought were indicated by the auction, which I cant remember for sure what they were but send me your constraints for what you think dummy and declarer should be and I would be glad to run it for you. in 0-13 per suit & hcp range for each hand

ran it through Lead Captain 9♦-23.50% J♦-23.21% 7♦-22.77% Q♠-20.77% cooked up 6,000 hands

sort of the opposite of one of the hands you were talking about in you discussions for playing with the bots. where you made a take out double with a big hand and diamonds and then couldn't bid 5♦ for a sac. when you redid the bids you overcalled with big hand then you were able to sac.

could be the variance in the type of bots used.

all roads other than pass lead to a disaster, at least you didn't bid 4NT like in some of the other posts:) if you had one more club than you might have tried 4NT but I never really felt like GIB will take pull of 5 diamonds to 5 hearts as showing hearts and clubs

it would seem that it should have a meaning doesn't opening 3NT show some wicked high range? I guess then if you hover and no explanation you are in unexplored GIB territory

what did the bidding box say when you hover over it before you bid it, if it isn't close to what you expect it to be don't do it.

no problems I cant count the times I have played 4NT down 8 in the past.

yes I used to post problems with 4NT takeout several years ago, to my knowledge it at least now plays 4NT as take out.

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/66702-gib-release-notes-updated-with-each-new-version/page__st__120 according to this GIB update its supposed to recognize that 2NT is minors and 4NT continues the takeout of the minors from D EVA Changes: GIB will now always pass after opening 2 of a major, responder bid 2N, opener bid anything, and responder bid 4 of the major. Before, it was sometimes bidding blackwood there. GIB will sometimes show a queen as a feature after a weak 2 bid, in order to do something other than rebidding his suit on good hands. After 1x - (2y) -, responder will properly bid 3 of a new suit on hands he had been passing, like 1♠ (2♥) 3♣ with 6 clubs and an 11 count where before it just passed. Also on the same auction, he will only bid 2N with the proper shapes now (before he would sometimes do it on weird shapes like 3055). Fixed a bug where GIB was sometimes passing 4NT bids that were obviously for the minors, like when someone bid unusual 2NT and then 4NT next round. Fixed a bug that was causing GIB to sometimes pass hands that obviously should be opened either 1 or 4 of a major. Improved definition of when certain jumps in competition are natural and when they are splinter bids. GIB no longer plays lebensohl after takeout doubles of weak 2 bids when the takeout doubler is a passed hand. 2NT there is natural now. Improved the requirements for GIB to show majors with a 2♦ overcall of a 1NT opening (before it had restrictive suit quality requirements even when the hand was strong and shapely). Other minor fixes and improvements.

thanks for the tip but i dont play in best hand games, i was just trying to clarify which versions of gib do what

I have noticed at times when going over results that some robots will bid shortness over bidding a 5 card secondary suit at the four level. I was wondering which robots are programmed to do which.

i don't really like it but it does cause problems for the opps as well as the responder but I have noticed that it does seem to work most of the time in the robot environment Just like with better values you can bid 2♦ with 4-4 in Majors the main problem I see is the robots always want to go to the three level.....defense to NT should be geared more for bidding partials (interference) over trying to get to game.

not how much time but $$$

GIB is pretty good at bidding the law of total tricks so I would expect partner to have at most 1♥. to me this almost analagous to the 4♥ pre empt transfer to 4♠ that you see alot of in vugraphs. I think it is risk vs gain on this one.

the other thing GIB does is a lot of time when it bids 2 Major it may be 4 card major and longer minor, which seems to work for GIB. so I guess by default the bidding here shows a three suiter. I have given up on figuring out what GIB really does. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. I would rather see GIB take an approach that game is unlikely when bidding over 1NT sort of a Bergen Cohen approach. I don't see how 3♦ can be forcing or 14-20 hcp must be a pinochle deck....but 2NT has to be show me your minor, 3♦ would force to 4♣ to me 3♦ would say I don't care what you have I have a lot of diamonds.