pclayton Posted June 9, 2008 Report Share Posted June 9, 2008 One thing I have noticed about GIB is that invariably it will 'bid one more'. I've had a lot of auctions recently where I have bid game, and GIB will bid slam, or I will bid slam and GIB will bid a grand. Here's an example from today: ♠AQ ♥void ♦AKQ9x ♣Q9xxxx (1♠) 2N (3♠) 4♦(P) 6♦ (P) 7♦ GIBs hand: ♠x ♥QJTxxx ♦ Jxx ♣Txx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matmat Posted June 9, 2008 Report Share Posted June 9, 2008 One thing I have noticed about GIB is that invariably it will 'bid one more'. I've had a lot of auctions recently where I have bid game, and GIB will bid slam, or I will bid slam and GIB will bid a grand. Here's an example from today: ♠AQ ♥void ♦AKQ9x ♣Q9xxxx (1♠) 2N (3♠) 4♦(P) 6♦ (P) 7♦ GIBs hand: ♠x ♥QJTxxx ♦ Jxx ♣Txx Phil, you gotta realize that GIB is a junior. He just turned 14. His bids are bound to be a little on the optimistic side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickRW Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 GIBs hand: ♠x ♥QJTxxx ♦ Jxx ♣Txx It'd be nice to know if GIB would also have bid 4♦ if it held ♠x ♥xxxxxx ♦Txx ♣xxx. If it would have, then perhaps there is at least some logic in it raising to 7 on what it actually held. One would need to take the bot and its database of rules (or whatever it has under the covers) apart to find out... Nick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickRW Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 It'd be nice to know if GIB would also have bid 4♦ if it held ♠x ♥xxxxxx ♦Txx ♣xxx. If it would have, then perhaps there is at least some logic in it raising to 7 on what it actually held. One would need to take the bot and its database of rules (or whatever it has under the covers) apart to find out... Nick Hmm. Replying to my own post, it appears it wouldn't bid 4♦ with the same shape but the honours removed. Further it thinks 4♦ shows 3+D and 9-13 - which it aint got unless it is counting length and shortages 1/3/5 (seriously optimistic on a 40hcp deck). So the thing was lying in its own terms even before it bid 7 I'm afraid - not that I can reproduce it bidding 7. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotShot Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 One thing I have noticed about GIB is that invariably it will 'bid one more'. I've had a lot of auctions recently where I have bid game, and GIB will bid slam, or I will bid slam and GIB will bid a grand. Here's an example from today: ♠AQ ♥void ♦AKQ9x ♣Q9xxxx (1♠) 2N (3♠) 4♦(P) 6♦ (P) 7♦ GIBs hand: ♠x ♥QJTxxx ♦ Jxx ♣Txx GIB is quite simple in his bidding. You jumped to slam over GIB's 4♦ bid. GIB now expects you to have 25+ HCP.Opps bid ♠ so GIB's simulation won't give you much HCP in ♠ other than the Ace.The double fit in the minors and its ♥ holding together with your points (that should not be wasted in ♠), suggests to bid 7. (Playing with GIB, you have to accept that GIB is the aggressive bidder in the partnership.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 GIBs hand: ♠x ♥QJTxxx ♦ Jxx ♣Txx It'd be nice to know if GIB would also have bid 4♦ if it held ♠x ♥xxxxxx ♦Txx ♣xxx. If it would have, then perhaps there is at least some logic in it raising to 7 on what it actually held. One would need to take the bot and its database of rules (or whatever it has under the covers) apart to find out... Nick Except that QJT in a side suit rarely yields the 13th trick when partner has shown a strong 2-suiter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickRW Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 Except that QJT in a side suit rarely yields the 13th trick when partner has shown a strong 2-suiter. No, of course. When I said "logic", I meant the sort of logic that one might suspect a computer program would apply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickRW Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 One thing I have noticed about GIB is that invariably it will 'bid one more'. I've had a lot of auctions recently where I have bid game, and GIB will bid slam, or I will bid slam and GIB will bid a grand. Here's an example from today: ♠AQ ♥void ♦AKQ9x ♣Q9xxxx (1♠) 2N (3♠) 4♦(P) 6♦ (P) 7♦ GIBs hand: ♠x ♥QJTxxx ♦ Jxx ♣Txx GIB is quite simple in his bidding. You jumped to slam over GIB's 4♦ bid. GIB now expects you to have 25+ HCP.Opps bid ♠ so GIB's simulation won't give you much HCP in ♠ other than the Ace.The double fit in the minors and its ♥ holding together with your points (that should not be wasted in ♠), suggests to bid 7. (Playing with GIB, you have to accept that GIB is the aggressive bidder in the partnership.) Well, yes. Except that it was already being aggressive in its own terms when it bid 4D. Then it was even more aggressive when it bid 7. To "take a view" once is permissible, to stretch twice is a serious breach of parternship discipline in most circumstances. It has to be seen as a bug in my view as it takes no account of the likely fact that partner may be relying on stuff you already don't hold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.