billyjef

shuba 50% billyjef 50% http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:6b04198b.df7b.11e7.a200.0cc47a39aeb4-1513110682&u=billyjef

billyjef 55% broze 45% http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:bd3d1a3c.debc.11e7.a200.0cc47a39aeb4-1513028786&u=billyjef

billyjef 55% derppp 45% http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:5e395e3d.deb8.11e7.a200.0cc47a39aeb4-1513026909&u=billyjef

stoppiello 60% billyjef 40% http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:13be574a.ded1.11e7.a200.0cc47a39aeb4-1513037521&u=billyjef#row-

sounds reasonable

ye17 65% billyjef 35% http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:e6f0e6f9.ddb1.11e7.a200.0cc47a39aeb4-1512914181&u=billyjef

cathcol 60% billyjef 40% http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:488692c8.dacd.11e7.a200.0cc47a39aeb4-1512596087&u=billyjef

billyjef 55% zupey 45% http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:54182e1b.dacd.11e7.a200.0cc47a39aeb4-1512596107&u=billyjef

OK, thanks.

I just issued a couple of challenges and still asked for .25 for advanced. Is that how it works or am I missing something?

I think it can be tricky because when partner does have a game forcing hand and makes a game forcing jump shift, after responder promised minimum values, there is no way to stop the train that I am aware of. Certainly, responder will sometimes have agreements to show defensive intentions, but in the realm of GIB, I didn't think 1/1 was one of them.

The chance for game is certainly an important factor to weigh in to the decision to bid, but does that fact solely determine if one should bid, outside of context? I wonder how much context GIB is able to process and inform it's actions. Or does it just look at the possibility of a 60% game and that satisfies the equation to bid? All very curious. I've always thought of myself as an aggressive and adventurous bidder, but, according this discussion, clearly I am more conservative than I imagined I was.

And holding 5♥

Apparently I need to adjust my restrictions for responding to 2/1 opening 1 bids.

I am aware of that condition, but lacking a weak jump shift, and I would not use a WJS with the hand even if I had it available, a 1NT response should still say, at the very least, I am bidding because if you have a maximum for your opening bid partner, we have game. I don't believe GIBs hand is good enough opposite a maximum 1 bid (outside a magic fit), and that for me is a criteria for making a response with minimum values; and in my world, what should be programmed into GIB's heuristic projective options.

I don't know Wayne...even if the robots used WJS, at least 3 diamonds shows less than enough strength for game opposite a maximum 1 bid. But again, with long experience with GIB, I personally hadn't experienced a bid like this from GIB and that is what surprised me in retrospect.

Yeah, while going to 4!h is hopeful by me, I've not experienced, in the past decade, GIB responding with so little value. i.e., it is the first bid that misled me more than the preference to hearts with only a singleton, not that that pleased me either!...LOL. As a human, I certainly would consider where I was going if I chose to respond, and partner bids 2 clubs...knowing that 2!d is GF. Do I really want to show partner we have enough for game if he is a maximum for his opening 1 bid? But to show sympathy, if we do find a fit, GIBs hand could produce as much as 4 tricks. Big IF though.

One of the ways I learned bridge was by practicing with GIB. As such, I often snicker, knowingly and sympathetically, when people share their frustrating experience with GIB. The one linked below, blew my mind and made me question what goes on heuristically to justify GIB's actions. http://tinyurl.com/ybapcfeg

I'll play

Vulnerable, teams, I doubt I'd have the power to not bid 4♥. Away from the table, objectively, I don't see the hand as 19 points, rather a poor 18. That all said, remove one of the minor suit jacks, where 4♥ isn't as tempting, what would more accurately describe the hand, 2N or 3♥? Just curious.

The hand has more downgrades than up grades and the presence of queens and jacks that will work better in notrump and tenaces that would prefer to be led up to in the hidden hand, I'll pretend my hand is 3333 and bid 2NT. K&R = 16.5 Kleinman = 18-

Bridge, the social game that attracts the antisocial. As someone on the antisocial spectrum, I am attracted to the game because it allows me some connection with others that feels safe due to the structured form of interaction. That said, before I added a mindful practice to my life, I was baffled by how often I became angry playing a game that I loved and allowed me a safe form of connection. Now I see how many people like me are attracted to the game, many of them very good players, the only difference is their level of awareness of what drives their behavior; usually satisfied with post rationalizations and justifications for their rudeness.

If I have a reasonable expectation of taking 4 tricks with my suit as trumps, and adhere to any silly HCP rules by governing bodies, then I like to bid...as that is the minimum my partner should be working with, 4 playing tricks. (It is my current temperament to round up, 3.5 playing tricks tend to get rounded up to 4.) Edit: I should add that I do expect 1M openers to have at least 1.5 defensive tricks as well.

Rainer or anyone else, correct me or comment freely please, I suspect the 4th best from longest and strongest is by the far most helpful lead we offer declarer albeit, still can be the best lead for an attacking defense if the strategy can be fulfilled timely, and I think that "if" is questioned these days. But if the leads are just count, not implying strength, although more likely to deny it in my current practice, what would benefit declarer more, information wise, a lead saying I'm not interested in this suit, or a lead showing count, all things being equal? Count (maybe implying attitude), vs attitude and no count. Jef Pratt

For my partnerships, the choice to lead attitude against NT is, with situational consideration, choosing to prefer not to lead from strength (i.e. preferring passive leads), especially dangling and tenace honor holdings. Strong honor combinations still take priority. So the weaker the 4 or 5+ card suit, tend to be more desirable to make a 4th lead, just not 4th from longest and strongest. Leading from Jacks or tens preferable to leading from queens...