Bbradley62 Posted January 1, 2016 Report Share Posted January 1, 2016 [hv=nn=Robot&n=SAK6H53DAKQ654CA4&d=w&v=o&b=8&a=P1D(Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20%21D%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)P1H(One%20over%20one%20--%204+%20%21H%3B%206+%20total%20points)P3N(11-21%20HCP%3B%20solid%207-card%20%21D%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%3B%20partial%20stop%20in%20%21C%3B%20partial%20stop%20in%20%21S)P]180|180[/hv]How are we supposed to evaluate what to do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lycier Posted January 1, 2016 Report Share Posted January 1, 2016 [hv=nn=Robot&n=SAK6H53DAKQ654CA4&d=w&v=o&b=8&a=P1D(Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20%21D%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)P1H(One%20over%20one%20--%204+%20%21H%3B%206+%20total%20points)P3N(11-21%20HCP%3B%20solid%207-card%20%21D%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%3B%20partial%20stop%20in%20%21C%3B%20partial%20stop%20in%20%21S)P]180|180[/hv]How are we supposed to evaluate what to do? Strangely,3nt says 12-21 hcp.I know 3nt usually shows 18+hcp with solid 7-card opening suit. This is common sense. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Tu Posted January 2, 2016 Report Share Posted January 2, 2016 Don't think it's supposed to promise 18+ HCP. I'd probably bid 3nt on something like QJx x AKQTxxx Ax. So 16+ HCP? 3nt is kind of a "I'm probably making this" bid, not a "I'm definitely making this" bid. It's semi-gambling, and other bids misdescriptive (3♦ too conservative, risks too many passes when 3nt makes, other bids involve fake jump shifts and bidding 3nt anyway so might as well just do it now). Robot's hand, I probably would have treated as 22-24 balanced, but GIB doesn't like to treat 6322 minor hands as "balanced", perhaps this something to look into. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lycier Posted January 2, 2016 Report Share Posted January 2, 2016 Great Stephen Tu, I perfectly agree with you, what you described confirms to the actual situation,however you need to give fixed meanings on 3NT for Gib. For this hand,3NT says "12-21hcp",it is not correct for sure, it seems likely that it is not easy to fix . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lycier Posted January 2, 2016 Report Share Posted January 2, 2016 Don't think it's supposed to promise 18+ HCP. I'd probably bid 3nt on something like QJx x AKQTxxx Ax. So 16+ HCP? 3nt is kind of a "I'm probably making this" bid, not a "I'm definitely making this" bid. It's semi-gambling, and other bids misdescriptive (3♦ too conservative, risks too many passes when 3nt makes, other bids involve fake jump shifts and bidding 3nt anyway so might as well just do it now). Robot's hand, I probably would have treated as 22-24 balanced, but GIB doesn't like to treat 6322 minor hands as "balanced", perhaps this something to look into. What you said are sure to improve my understanding and bidding, thank you very much, but here is Gib robot forum, from the perspective of beginner,intermediate and advanced players, my definition of 3NT should be correct.What you said are expert guidance to me,not defined. Am I correct?http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifOr else,would you define playable 3NT? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted January 2, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2016 What you said are sure to improve my understanding and bidding, thank you very much, but here is Gib robot forum, from the perspective of beginner,intermediate and advanced players, my definition of 3NT should be correct.What you said are expert guidance to me,not defined. Am I correct? ... Or else,would you define playable 3NT?I agree with Stephen's "semi-gambling" description. It should not be a hand that has enough HCP to normally justify bidding game, as this one has. This is not an expert interpretation. I would probably do it with only one outside A/K, not in partner's suit. PS: BBO's Step-by-Step convention card called "SAYC" described this bid as "16-17 HCP... 6+ solid ♦". Probably too restrictive to be bid frequently, but it certainly gives partner a much better idea of whether to move or not. The "BBO Advanced 3.1" convention card describes it as "signoff. running ♦; short in ♥". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lycier Posted January 2, 2016 Report Share Posted January 2, 2016 Yes, I have been finding that I often read Stephen Tu's thread every time, I usually can learn some new knowlege from him.However I am afraid that many of intermediate players not necessarily accept this principle for what he said immediately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Tu Posted January 2, 2016 Report Share Posted January 2, 2016 My posts in this particular subforum are almost always intended for all levels, and suitable for GIB system as GIB system is fairly complicated already; GIB system is not stripped down beginner system. I think GIB system all bid should be defined reasonably; it might not occur to beginner that rebid 3nt is option, but if they do choose it they might as well learn it means this, as what else can it really mean? And if GIB choose it then this semi-gambling meaning is right also, just the rule should define the HCP range more accurately than it currently does. If I have a comment for an expert treatment not suitable for GIB, I always mention it in my post, for this subforum, although I'd probably never even bother to mention in this subforum. My comments in this subforum are mainly:- report GIB bugs I encounter (though I have not played much with robots lately)- provide my suggestion for how GIB rule ought to be improved, if no one else already beat me to it with suggestion I agree with.- occasionally dispute posts from others if I particularly disagree with their opinion of how GIB should be changed/defined in certain situation For this problem, I think it is sufficient to change HCP limit to 16-19. Maybe solid 6 diamond is OK also, not require 7. And restrict to 2- card in responder's major maybe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted January 2, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2016 For this problem, I think it is sufficient to change HCP limit to 16-19. Maybe solid 6 diamond is OK also, not require 7. And restrict to 2- card in responder's major maybe.I think this is clearly too high, but decreasing the range in any way would be an improvement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lycier Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 [hv=nn=Robot&n=SAK6H53DAKQ654CA4&d=w&v=o&b=8&a=P1D(Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20%21D%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)P1H(One%20over%20one%20--%204+%20%21H%3B%206+%20total%20points)P3N(11-21%20HCP%3B%20solid%207-card%20%21D%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%3B%20partial%20stop%20in%20%21C%3B%20partial%20stop%20in%20%21S)P]180|180[/hv]How are we supposed to evaluate what to do? Today I take time to research this problem, I found Gib CC at below.1♣ - 1♦ - 3nt = 11-21hcp,solid 7-card ♣,12-22TPs,partial stop in ♠,partial stop in ♥.1m - 1NT - 3NT = 19-21hcp 22-TPs1m - 1M - 3NT = 11-21hcp,solid 7-card suit,12-22TPs,partial stop in other side suits.1M - 1NT - 3NT = 5-card M, 19-21hcp,22-TPs.1♥ - 1♠ - 3NT = 2-5♣,2-5♦,5♥,2-3♠,20-21HCP, For example :[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn=lycier&s=SKHAKQ943DK65CQ32&wn=机器人&w=SJ963H876D43CJT75&nn=机器人&n=SAQ87542HDAQ7C986&en=机器人&e=STHJT52DJT982CAK4&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=P1H(Major%20suit%20opening%20--%205+%20%21H%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B)P1S(One%20over%20one%20--%204+%20%21S%3B%206+%20total%20points)P3N(2-5%20%21C%3B%202-5%20%21D%3B%205%20%21H%3B%202-3%20%21S%3B%2020-21%20HCP%3B)P4N(Quantitative%20invite%20to%206NT%20--%204+%20%21S%3B%2012%20HCP)PPP&p=D4D7D8DKHAH6C6H5HKH7C8H2HQH8C9HTSKS6S2STD5D3DQD2SAC4H3S3SQDJH4SJS8DTH9S9CJS4CKC2HJD6C5S5CAC3CTS7D9CQC7DA]400|300[/hv] Obviously,11-21hcp or 18+hcp of my definition are not correct, so I think 16+hcp of Stephen Tu's definition is best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iandayre Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 Using GIB's methods I believe you are expected to open 2C with this hand. It is too strong to open 1D and jump to 3NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted January 6, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Using GIB's methods I believe you are expected to open 2C with this hand. It is too strong to open 1D and jump to 3NT.GIB-North opened 1♦. He counts his hand as 20 HCP + 1 shortness point in hearts = 21 total points, which he thinks is within his 1♦ range. 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.