BBO Discussion Forums: Negativity - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Negativity

#1 User is offline   uva72uva72 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 245
  • Joined: 2014-June-09

Posted 2015-September-26, 12:24

My link
IMPS, ACBL robot individual

I earned my 10-IMP loss here because I failed to follow my own rule of ALWAYS checking the notes before making a bid. Still, I had a lot of company in missing this game. Presumably my fellow underbidders were also unaware that the robots play negative free bids in this sequence.
0

#2 User is offline   steve2005 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,148
  • Joined: 2010-April-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hamilton, Canada
  • Interests:Bridge duh!

Posted 2015-September-26, 13:20

View Postuva72uva72, on 2015-September-26, 12:24, said:

My link
Presumably my fellow underbidders were also unaware that the robots play negative free bids in this sequence.

2 is not a negative free bid. A negative free bid has an upper limit usually most can have is 10-12, some even play lighter and varies by partnership. Your bid is described as unlimited.
Sarcasm is a state of mind
0

#3 User is offline   1eyedjack 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,575
  • Joined: 2004-March-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 2015-September-26, 14:17

I think that part and parcel of negative free bids is that double followed by new suit is stronger than NFB and is forcing. I also think that the bottom of the range to bid a direct 2H would be weaker than that described here. I do not believe that GIB plays that way, and from recollection I think that new suit via X would show a weaker hand than direct 2H as described.

I don't think that you should read too much into the fact that "your bid is described as unlimited". It may have been described as unlimited but it appears to have been interpreted as limited. Where there is a mismatch between interpretation and explanation, why would you put faith in either (in this case explanation) at the expense of the other? If anything, forced to choose, then except in the case of "obvious bug" I would assume MI.

There is another possibility: GIB may have included a powerhouse as a possibility for South and yet after doing some sims decided that on grounds of frequency you are more likely to overreach opposite a minimum 2H than to miss game opposite a 2H that happens to have extras. Not a healthy piece of code, I think, if that is the explanation.
Psych (pron. saik): A gross and deliberate misstatement of honour strength and/or suit length. Expressly permitted under Law 73E but forbidden contrary to that law by Acol club tourneys.

Psyche (pron. sahy-kee): The human soul, spirit or mind (derived, personification thereof, beloved of Eros, Greek myth).
Masterminding (pron. mPosted ImagesPosted ImagetPosted Imager-mPosted ImagendPosted Imageing) tr. v. - Any bid made by bridge player with which partner disagrees.

"Gentlemen, when the barrage lifts." 9th battalion, King's own Yorkshire light infantry,
2000 years earlier: "morituri te salutant"

"I will be with you, whatever". Blair to Bush, precursor to invasion of Iraq
0

#4 User is offline   Bbradley62 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,542
  • Joined: 2010-February-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA

Posted 2015-September-27, 23:14

I still think there needs to be a global change to say that every bid that is described as unlimited is forcing one round. If it's not really unlimited, then fix the provided explanation.
0

#5 User is offline   iandayre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,114
  • Joined: 2013-December-23
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2015-September-29, 11:48

About a year ago I had GIB perpetrate a similar auction with me, passing a forcing new suit bid by an unpassed hand. In my post, I pointed out that nowhere in the system notes are negative free bids shown, therefore I have every right to assume that a new suit is forcing. My recollection is that someone from BBO agreed, and that in a subsequent release such bids were established as forcing. And I must say, I have not had GIB pass one since that time. Clearly it did so here, and it would seem that the fix must be re-fixed.

I am quite sure that Jack is correct, in GIB's methods a negative double followed by a suit bid is limited and non-forcing. So also allowing GIB to pass a new suit bid by an unpassed hand is unplayable.
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users