dartagnan9

Thanks for all of the informed replies. Actually, to clarify, my question wasn't what to do in robot play, but more to discuss with my very real offline partner. (It's just that the example came up in robot play.) I'd argue, though, that even in robot races, where you know partner is, at best, the same strength, there'd still be a possibility of a slam, if you have a hand that would be considered too strong for a preempt as strictly defined. But AWM's statistical analysis speaks volumes. My partner agreed yesterday to stick to clear preempts, but those statistic, and the explanation behind them, make me want to reconsider. Great discussion. Thanks, Keith

Hi A little personal history. I learned bridge about twenty years ago, played seriously for about 8 years, then packed it in until a couple of years ago. In the interregnum, things changed a pace, and I'm constantly learning that my old bidding practices are out-of-date. So I'm wondering about opening 4 of a major. I'm fairly strict about preempts: very little strength outside of bid suit; good sequence of honors; not openable at the one level. But ... The other day I played a hand with 8 spades, AQJ and at least an outside Ace - don't remember the exact layout. This was a robot race. I opened 1 heart. We were vulnerable. Bidding was competitive, and with resolutely no support from partner, I declined to overcall their 4 hearts. I got a bottom. I was curious about how others bid, and found that, almost without exception, people had opened my hand 4 spades. This left me confused. How is partner supposed to know if it's a true pre-emptive bid, or a strong hand? You might belong in slam, but if a 4-level preempt in a major can ALSO mean 8 trump, with no side honors, how do I know what to do, as the partner. It seems to me that if you have the kind of hand I described above, you're better opening at the one level, and finding out what your partner has. So have practices changed? Many thanks! Keith

Hi, sorry, I meant to, but I was having problems with my PC. Here's a link to it. Have to paste it as text. For some reason the link tool in the editor is not working for me. Looking at it again, it's even worse than I remembered. GIB bids clubs 4 times, having only 5 headed by a Q, and 4 HCP in total. http://screencast.com/t/bKU1dNub And yes, I'm well aware I was on a wild goose chase by continually trying to bid my spades, but it was out of sheer frustration!

This has happened so many times, and every time it happens, I send a GIB report. Nothing ever gets done. Perhaps it's my own misunderstanding? I double an opening bid. I have an 8 card spade suit, and 20 points. My partner bids 2 clubs. I bid my spades. Shouldn't that show a strong hand in spades? GIB's response? He rebids his clubs, and will go on rebidding them all the way to grand slam, even if he only has 5 clubs headed by the Queen, and 3 HCP (or even less!) Like I said, I waste a couple of minutes of my RR tournament to send in yet another GIB report. Because they never respond to GIB reports, and nothing ever gets done, no matter how egregious the play or bid, I'm beginning to feel they don't even look at them. Or am I completely off base about what take out double followed by bidding my suit means? Now, even if GIB does not interpret it the way I do, there's still no reason to take me to grand slam with such a pathetic hand. So either way you cut it, it's a bad bug, which has been there a long time, and nothing gets done to fix it. It leaves one feeling powerless to effect change. I've yet to have a BBO response to anything I've posted in this forum, and since they won't do personal responses to GIB reports, you're left feeling that BBO is resistant to fixing things, and has no interest in listening to the community. Thanks, Keith

I appreciate why you might not want to respond and take up a lot of time in to and fro, but until I found out about the "report GIB" right-hand click off the hand, I thought my only option to report things like this (which happen virtually every tournament) was to post here. If you rarely respond, it begins to feel for me like a futile exercise since I don't know if anybody at BBO cares. Perhaps you could post a sticky note on this forum explaining your policies on responses, and also highlighting the "report GIB" button? (I apologize if such a note is already there, and I just missed it.) Keith

Oh! Didn't know about that. That's perfect!

Maybe your posts are particularly interesting :)

Hi, please see image. I had a strong heart hand, which I opened 1H. East overcalled 2 diamonds. I jumped to 3 hearts. For some reason, my partner, instead of making the obvious 4 heart bid, showed his club suit. He had 5 total points, and two card support for hearts. This is bad bidding, purely. By the way, could people please comment on the following: how often do you get a response from BBO on posts like this? I feel as if it's quite rare - at least for me. Which leaves me feeling kind of powerless to do anything, or help improve things. Have others had this experience, or is it more likely just my own perception? Thanks, Keith P.s. I realize it would have been better to attach whole hand, but I was in the middle of the robot race, and had to act quickly. http://www.brokenwhole.com/images/temp/oct102010/ScreenShot.jpg

Then shouldn't there be a simple coding step that says: oh, I only have one card in that suit. Therefore no need to do any simulations?

The problem is still there, and I'm not aware that BB responded. I didn't expect them to, which is disappointing. However, I think something has changed - they're faster than they were, although still the same occasional meaningless pause (e.g. when playing the last card!) It's just not as bad as it was a few weeks ago, it seems to me.

I don't mean to be overly feisty, but I'm convinced it has nothing to do with the user's network. While the GIB is hesitating to play, I can often see somebody else's score increasing. I couldn't receive that information without network latency, but then not receive the information that makes the card play. Also the dynamics of how this happen also argue against it being anything to do with network latency. It never ever happens once the play has speeded up. Only in the first half of the hand - but even their, it's frequently not due to any difficulty in making a choice of play when the play is very obvious. Can I suggest that the developer try it himself? I don't know if the server is local to you, so suggest playing where it's not - i.e. at a cafe, or something. Are you able to capture debugging information about the time each GIB play takes? That would show you the same thing. Maybe that would help understand what's happening while it delays. Thanks, Keith P.s. I just want to reiterate: I'm convinced this is a software issue, not a network issue. Or, at the very least, if it's a network issue, it's not dependent on the user's network, since I experience the same delays even on a very fast T1 line at a university. Same delay whether I'm playing on slow WiFi at Starbucks, or my much faster connection at home.

Thanks for all the points and answers etc. I know I was mad when I posted it, and I could have used more temperate language. I'm a long-term software developer too, and I like to give feedback in the hope that things can be improved for everybody. But I "concede" that the carrot is better than the stick :) "Can dartagnan9 please at least concede that he should have his facts right before posting complaints?" & "You should be able to gather the whole sordid mess using My Hands." I'm happy to concede that I was wrong. But I did forewarn: I said in my msg that "I believe" my opening bid was 1H. I should have stated that more clearly, but since I couldn't see it, and it was not (despite what the above says) in "My Hands", I couldn't be sure, and that seemed the most logical deduction. But yes, I was wrong. For some reason, almost always, I don't find the RR$.25 hands in My Hands. Or is it just that they arrive late? I thought I checked the next day, once, and still couldn't find it. Yes, I should have just given up and let GIB have his blessed 5D, but I was intent on hammering on the head at the time and didn't think to stop :) Thanks all, Keith

I feel as if I'm hitting a brick wall. Can somebody tell me: does anything ever come of bug discussions in terms of changes? It's frustrating to see the same things repeated over and over again, and nothing happens. I did a screen capture since I didn't want to waste time trying to save the hand to BBO while the contract was going south. The screen capture does not show the entire bidding sequence. http://www.brokenwhole.com/misc/ScreenShot2.jpg I believe the only missing bid is my opening bid of 1♥. From there it was lunacy. GIB wouldn't accept that I clearly had a superstrong heart hand which I bid 5 times (including jumping to game), and it kept preferring its stupid, weak diamond hand all the way to grand slam in diamonds! As far as it knew, I had no diamonds at all! Yet it did have support for hearts! Can a bug be more clear than this? This sort of thing has happened to me numerous times. Can the GIB developers please at least concede there's a problem here? Keith Adams

Well, it would be nice if a developer could explain it. It's certainly true that it's only in the first half, before it speeds up faster than the eye can see! But I doubt it's because it's trying to figure out the play. Because it also happens when the GIB defender is humming and hawing about playing a card. He doesn't have nearly as much to figure out as the declarer, yet can take just as long to decide on playing in a situation where it obviously doesn't matter which card he plays! Thanks, Keith

That's great to know about the viewer link, thanks! Maybe it's because it's the end of a long Saturday, but I can't follow the odds calculations, but I'm sure you're right, ahydra - statistics & probability were never my strong suit (no pun intended)! Just one point though, and then I'll shut up. It may be that this is the human judgment that comes in: it seems unlikely to me that East would have led the jack without the 10. It's impossible to calculate those odds because it depends on your assessments of how many people would play the jack in that situation lacking the 10. My assessment is that few would, but I'm almost certainly not as experienced in the science of opening leads as many on the board, so I grant I could be wrong. But if you take my assessment as correct, then the only time it's worth taking the finesse is if East has J 10 only. And to me it seems vastly unlikely somebody would lead from J 10 doubleton against NT. Of course, if I'd included the link, it would have been clearer since you could judge whether the distribution in the other suits precluded not leading clubs in the first place. I suppose this is what makes bridge so interesting! Thanks Keith