BBO Discussion Forums: What's meanings of rebid-2S? - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

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

What's meanings of rebid-2S?

#1 User is offline   lycier 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,612
  • Joined: 2009-September-28
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:China

Posted 2016-December-27, 13:41

This hand is from Arena Challenge.

0

#2 User is offline   nige1 

  • 5-level belongs to me
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,128
  • Joined: 2004-August-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Glasgow Scotland
  • Interests:Poems Computers

Posted 2016-December-27, 18:48

 lycier, on 2016-December-27, 13:41, said:

This hand is from Arena Challenge.

Gib displays an explanation of its systemic agreement, when you click on the yellow high-light. So, that is what you should assume. IMO, however, your 2 should admit to a substandard opening bid. Hence, more sensibly, 2 should be a misfit, natural with 5+ good s. If it were not by a passed hand, then it would invite game.
0

#3 User is offline   iandayre 

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

Posted 2016-December-28, 12:54

 lycier, on 2016-December-27, 13:41, said:

This hand is from Arena Challenge.



Actually the description fits the bid! Of course the description, and the bid, are utter nonsense. We all know that GIB's originator wasn't an expert bidder, but this is one of the more bizarre and extreme examples of that. Especially given that partner obviously has no idea what to do over the call. It is also true that 2D should show a weak distributional opening bid, making a 2H preference clear-cut. The double of 1NT already showed cards. 2S bids the same values again, and inaccurately.
1

#4 User is offline   Stephen Tu 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,070
  • Joined: 2003-May-14

Posted 2016-December-28, 16:30

 iandayre, on 2016-December-28, 12:54, said:

Actually the description fits the bid! Of course the description, and the bid, are utter nonsense. We all know that GIB's originator wasn't an expert bidder, but this is one of the more bizarre and extreme examples of that.


I really don't think that the majority of GIB's problems are due to lack of bridge bidding knowledge of the original programmer of the bidding engine (I think Rod Ludwig of Meadowlark), but more due to the extreme complexity of being able to make enough rules to accurately cover all possible bidding sequences. It's not like you can just write down every possible sequence and supply a meaning. You have a bunch of rules, then it tries to map an auction to existing rules. Once you start adding redoubles and what not the number of sequences starts looking infinite in practical terms. Some auction not defined, it gropes for some sort of rule that matches and makes the bid.

Basically if you ask the programmer, he would say yes that bid isn't right, he would know that. It's just hard to write enough rules that an appropriate one gets triggered on complex competitive auctions. Wouldn't matter if the original programmer was a bridge bidding savant, it's extremely difficult to dumb that knowledge down into a set of rules that an idiot that knows nothing about bridge principles can follow (the computer).
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