BBO Discussion Forums: Suggest over another - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Suggest over another could 3C be demonstrably suggested over pass

#21 User is offline   Cascade 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Yellows
  • Posts: 6,666
  • Joined: 2003-July-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Zealand
  • Interests:Juggling, Unicycling

Posted 2017-March-02, 19:58

View Postnige1, on 2017-March-02, 15:57, said:

We aren't privy to NS methods. Had East passed then 2 might well be Pass/Correct. After East's double, South's suit-bids are more likely to be natural. Presumably, redouble would ask for North's 2nd suit. 2N has more than one likely meaning. Anyway, IMO, with tolerance, South would be likely to pass, in tempo.


2 is pass or correct. Not sure if they have a meaning for redouble.
Wayne Burrows

I believe that the USA currently hold only the World Championship For People Who Still Bid Like Your Auntie Gladys - dburn
dunno how to play 4 card majors - JLOGIC
True but I know Standard American and what better reason could I have for playing Precision? - Hideous Hog
Bidding is an estimation of probabilities SJ Simon

#22 User is offline   Cascade 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Yellows
  • Posts: 6,666
  • Joined: 2003-July-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Zealand
  • Interests:Juggling, Unicycling

Posted 2017-March-02, 20:39

View Postbarmar, on 2017-March-02, 08:44, said:

They're rewording it in the new laws, and there was quite a bit of discussion in the Yahoo group about it. I'm not sure what the final language is, though.


Rather than change the wording and it is strange to me too as Helene suggested, I think we would be better served with some test that could be applied to determine whether something is suggested. With such a test we perhaps could hope for some better consistency and objectivity in determining whether the something is suggested over another call.

Here we have a discussion that mostly seems to think that 3 is suggested over pass if I am interpreting the responses correctly. When this happened the appeal committee that I would otherwise have thought was a very good committee voted unanimously that 3 was not suggested by the break in tempo. As I wrote earlier they did not specifically say "3 could not be demonstably suggested over pass" which I think was an error and I can't be sure whether the error was in their reasoning or their writing/communicating.

Whatever the interpretation we shouldn't have the situation where one set of fine minds thinks there is no problem and therefore no need for an adjustment whilst another set of equally fine minds thinks that a player should be barred from bidding 3 and therefore that an adjustment is necessary.
Wayne Burrows

I believe that the USA currently hold only the World Championship For People Who Still Bid Like Your Auntie Gladys - dburn
dunno how to play 4 card majors - JLOGIC
True but I know Standard American and what better reason could I have for playing Precision? - Hideous Hog
Bidding is an estimation of probabilities SJ Simon

#23 User is offline   nige1 

  • 5-level belongs to me
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,941
  • Joined: 2004-August-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Glasgow Scotland
  • Interests:Poems Computers

Posted 2017-March-03, 05:40

View PostCascade, on 2017-March-02, 20:39, said:

Rather than change the wording and it is strange to me too as Helene suggested, I think we would be better served with some test that could be applied to determine whether something is suggested. With such a test we perhaps could hope for some better consistency and objectivity in determining whether the something is suggested over another call.

Several times, here and elsewhere, I've suggested such a test. Roughly, in summary:
  • Poll peers of the player as to what actions they'd seriously consider.
  • Add the action chosen by the player to the list of LAs.
  • Ask pollees to rank the list.
  • Tell pollees about the UI.
  • Ask pollees to re-order the list, pretending the UI is AI.
  • Check whether the rank of the player's chosen action improves.

When this protocol is impractical, it might still clarify relevant concepts, as a useful thought-experiment for the TD.

As is usual for my suggestions, this attracted ridicule :)
0

#24 User is offline   mycroft 

  • Secretary Bird
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,877
  • Joined: 2003-July-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary, Canada

Posted 2017-March-03, 09:46

My suggestion that we have a series of case studies with the imprimatur of Laws Commission approval for this Law (or, better yet, an Appendix to the Laws) was considered a good idea by the LC member. Having said that, it felt like "that's a good idea, but we both know it won't happen."

Which sort of is my point in that other thread.
0

#25 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 16,291
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-March-04, 12:08

View PostCascade, on 2017-March-02, 20:39, said:

Rather than change the wording and it is strange to me too as Helene suggested, I think we would be better served with some test that could be applied to determine whether something is suggested. With such a test we perhaps could hope for some better consistency and objectivity in determining whether the something is suggested over another call.

Indeed, that's what much of the discussion was about. Someone recommended something involving determining how the UI changes the expected probability of success of each action. So if it was 60/40 before the UI, and changes to 70/30, you're not allowed to choose the first action, because its probability of success has increased. Furthermore, if it was 80/20 and changes to 60/40, you're not allowed to choose the second action -- it's still less like to succeedthan the first, but its success probability has increased.

#26 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,753
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2017-March-04, 14:19

View Postbarmar, on 2017-March-04, 12:08, said:

Indeed, that's what much of the discussion was about. Someone recommended something involving determining how the UI changes the expected probability of success of each action. So if it was 60/40 before the UI, and changes to 70/30, you're not allowed to choose the first action, because its probability of success has increased. Furthermore, if it was 80/20 and changes to 60/40, you're not allowed to choose the second action -- it's still less like to succeedthan the first, but its success probability has increased.

Hm. Seems to me that second assertion runs afoul of "over another" in the law.
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
0

#27 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 16,291
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-March-05, 12:05

View Postblackshoe, on 2017-March-04, 14:19, said:

Hm. Seems to me that second assertion runs afoul of "over another" in the law.

I think he was suggesting a wholesale rewrite of that law, to conform with the logic he was proposing. I think the idea is for 16B to express the same thing as 73C (which says you must avoid taking any advantage from the UI), but in a more detailed way regarding logical alternatives.

#28 User is offline   mycroft 

  • Secretary Bird
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,877
  • Joined: 2003-July-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary, Canada

Posted 2017-March-06, 13:06

We still have to deal with the "I know that 4 will be rolled back, but since 6 isn't logical here opposite a 'questionable invitiation', let's try that." It's not 80/20, it's 80/18/2; but since the player believes (with the UI) that +200 will be almost the same zero as -100, why not try it?
0

#29 User is offline   dokoko 

  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 57
  • Joined: 2017-May-30

Posted 2017-August-06, 04:18

Assuming advanced players using unusual methods not thoroughly discussed, i bet their "agreement" is as follows:

1. If a player judges action is called for but doesn't know how to act, he will hesitate (naturally as there is no simple solution to his problem). Partner will get the message and choose the best action from his point of view. This will be a guess and can be argued as such (and accepted by most TDs) if successful. Obviously advancer didn't suggest the specific action taken.

2. First Player will normally not hesitate if he is unsure whether to take action at all, because he will fear that partner will act (on the hesitation) and will run when it might be better to stay.

This kind of agreement obviously is never explicit but any experienced player will "feel" it is wrong to hesitate in situation 2 (because of previous accidents) but it's ok to hesitate in situation 1 (because of some good results). This even applies to casual partnerships as the claimed experience isn't partnership-specific.

In fact I can't remember ever being asked "What would you bid if you were unsure of your methods?" by a TD resolving an UI situation. And even then, I guess, away from the table most ppl would first decide what methods would apply if undiscussed and then select their call based upon the method chosen. This is not the pragmatic approach a reasonable player would use at the table.

So my reasoning as TD would be as follows:

1. By choosing your unusual methods you are responsible for any problem that may cause.
2. A hesitation in unclear situations tends to require partner to act.
3. So any action is deemed influenced by UI unless there is evidence to the contrary.

You may put it the other way round: A pass without hesitation suggests partner is happy in 2h, the hesitation suggests partner isn't that happy. Hence a non-pass is suggested by the UI.
0

#30 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,753
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2017-August-06, 07:51

View Postdokoko, on 2017-August-06, 04:18, said:

2. A hesitation in unclear situations tends to require partner to act.

I don't buy this. It is contrary to law.
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
1

#31 User is offline   dokoko 

  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 57
  • Joined: 2017-May-30

Posted 2017-September-10, 06:06

View Postblackshoe, on 2017-August-06, 07:51, said:

I don't buy this. It is contrary to law.


Obviously it's contrary to the law, but that's how humans act.
0

#32 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,753
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2017-September-10, 16:46

I think you misunderstood. It is contrary to law to rule that a hesitation tends to require partner of the hesitater to act without investigating the LAs and which are demonstrably suggested over which others.
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
0

#33 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 16,291
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-September-11, 09:08

Figuring out what a hesitation suggests is hard. I think what he's saying is that directors are biased in a particular direction, and it's difficult to overcome that. Directors are, after all, only human.

#34 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,753
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2017-September-11, 19:17

Well, maybe. Is Cthonic a director? B-)
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
0

#35 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 16,291
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-September-12, 10:28

View Postblackshoe, on 2017-September-11, 19:17, said:

Well, maybe. Is Cthonic a director? B-)

Gratefully, no. And if it were, it could probably calculate a way to issue a penalty for you misspelling its name.

Now you've got me imagining Chthonic visiting a "certain North London club" -- there may be a explosion of insufferability.

#36 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,753
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2017-September-12, 20:01

ROFL!

I knew it was wrong, but I didn't have time to figure out why.
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
0

#37 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 16,291
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-September-13, 09:07

View Postblackshoe, on 2017-September-12, 20:01, said:

ROFL!

I knew it was wrong, but I didn't have time to figure out why.

Because you're merely a human, of course!

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 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