fuburules3 Posted September 6, 2014 Report Share Posted September 6, 2014 http://tinyurl.com/py2c38n I think it would be preferable if in this auction GIB gave preference to 3S 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted September 6, 2014 Report Share Posted September 6, 2014 actually the 3♦ bid was also wrong as it denies 3-card spades support Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iandayre Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 To address Helene's point first, I believe that GIB plays support doubles through 2H. That is how I do it and it's the most common treatment. To the main point, and without being personal, I believe that Fred Gitelman should be quite embarrassed, from a business perspective, to be promoting a bridge-playing program that has been in use for quite some years, and that is still making egregious blunders such as this. Perhaps GIB is too small a part of the overall BBO enterprise to merit investing sufficient resources to improve the programming and bid descriptions to a decent level. I saw a recent hand with similar bidding where GIB incorrectly failed to take a S preference with Qx vs xx in H, but the pass of 3H here defies any rationality. For my part, I will say that I am paying to play in ACBL games with these GIB robots, and as a consumer I demand better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgi Posted September 9, 2014 Report Share Posted September 9, 2014 Thanks for reporting. Fixed in next version. It won't find problem to pick the fit call. Btw, 3♠ would have mean: 5+ ♦; 3+ ♠; 10-14 total points Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted September 9, 2014 Report Share Posted September 9, 2014 actually the 3♦ bid was also wrong as it denies 3-card spades supportTo address Helene's point first, I believe that GIB plays support doubles through 2H. That is how I do it and it's the most common treatment.Helene's comment was probably based on the fact that the description of 3♦ includes "2-♠". 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.