Help
Non-vulnerable, sitting south, east opens
(1C)-X-(XX)-1D;
(2C)-2H-(3H)-p
(3S)-5D-p-6D
X-ap
GiB N had the hand Qxx x Jxxx QJxxx.
My hand is Axx AJTxxx KTxx --.
1. Can GiB somehow pass with this hand after the XX?
I admit technically he had the bid but this bid presumably is made usually for much better hands.
2. I did overbid, but I like my chances of making 5D opposing AQxxx diamonds so I bid it. Now GiB, certainly enough, thought 5D meant 29-30 points and raised to 6. This problem has been discussed so many times. Why there is no fix? There is no such bridge logic saying he could raise to 6 with his hand. He is sub-minimum of his bid already; if I had 29-30 points I would bid 6 myself since I saw his free bid after XX.
3. In general, I feel recent versions of GiB has poorer slam bidding skills. It is somewhat more slam-aware but those jump to small slam very often results in a slam lacking two aces where he certainly has an RKCB bid available. Sometimes it is even worse; the contract is just so far off. In those cases I can see there might be a hand fitting my bidding which can make the slam makeable but for an average hand of the bid it is rather a long shot. It seemed to me in the earlier versions of GiB he didn't jump as recklessly and once he jumped the contract is usually of reasonable playability.
Page 1 of 1
GiB forced response Again and Again...
#2
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 536
- Joined: 2003-May-28
- Location:Saltlake City
Posted 2010-March-25, 15:35
allfail, on Mar 25 2010, 09:15 PM, said:
Non-vulnerable, sitting south, east opens
(1C)-X-(XX)-1D;
(2C)-2H-(3H)-p
(3S)-5D-p-6D
X-ap
GiB N had the hand Qxx x Jxxx QJxxx.
My hand is Axx AJTxxx KTxx --.
1. Can GiB somehow pass with this hand after the XX?
I admit technically he had the bid but this bid presumably is made usually for much better hands.
2. I did overbid, but I like my chances of making 5D opposing AQxxx diamonds so I bid it. Now GiB, certainly enough, thought 5D meant 29-30 points and raised to 6. This problem has been discussed so many times. Why there is no fix? There is no such bridge logic saying he could raise to 6 with his hand. He is sub-minimum of his bid already; if I had 29-30 points I would bid 6 myself since I saw his free bid after XX.
3. In general, I feel recent versions of GiB has poorer slam bidding skills. It is somewhat more slam-aware but those jump to small slam very often results in a slam lacking two aces where he certainly has an RKCB bid available. Sometimes it is even worse; the contract is just so far off. In those cases I can see there might be a hand fitting my bidding which can make the slam makeable but for an average hand of the bid it is rather a long shot. It seemed to me in the earlier versions of GiB he didn't jump as recklessly and once he jumped the contract is usually of reasonable playability.
(1C)-X-(XX)-1D;
(2C)-2H-(3H)-p
(3S)-5D-p-6D
X-ap
GiB N had the hand Qxx x Jxxx QJxxx.
My hand is Axx AJTxxx KTxx --.
1. Can GiB somehow pass with this hand after the XX?
I admit technically he had the bid but this bid presumably is made usually for much better hands.
2. I did overbid, but I like my chances of making 5D opposing AQxxx diamonds so I bid it. Now GiB, certainly enough, thought 5D meant 29-30 points and raised to 6. This problem has been discussed so many times. Why there is no fix? There is no such bridge logic saying he could raise to 6 with his hand. He is sub-minimum of his bid already; if I had 29-30 points I would bid 6 myself since I saw his free bid after XX.
3. In general, I feel recent versions of GiB has poorer slam bidding skills. It is somewhat more slam-aware but those jump to small slam very often results in a slam lacking two aces where he certainly has an RKCB bid available. Sometimes it is even worse; the contract is just so far off. In those cases I can see there might be a hand fitting my bidding which can make the slam makeable but for an average hand of the bid it is rather a long shot. It seemed to me in the earlier versions of GiB he didn't jump as recklessly and once he jumped the contract is usually of reasonable playability.
Gib's 1D doesn't show any extra. You probably overbid for about 10 points IMO.
#3
- The Abbess
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,401
- Joined: 2004-April-22
- Gender:Female
- Location:Odense, Denmark
- Interests:History, languages
Posted 2010-March-25, 16:41
Yeah GIB promised 0 points and 4 diamonds so in a way it has extras, but it's not like those queens are very useful for slam. I think it should have passed 5♦.
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
#4
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 213
- Joined: 2007-November-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:Houston, TX
Posted 2010-March-25, 16:52
singleton ♥x may be extra , south can have a hand like x AQJxxxxx AKQT - 
double, new suit, and jump to game should show a freak hand I think.
double, new suit, and jump to game should show a freak hand I think.
#5
- - - T98765432 AQT8
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,085
- Joined: 2005-June-23
- Gender:Male
- Location:Las Vegas, NV
Posted 2010-March-25, 17:29
I also blame you more than gib. If this were assign the blame and you were both people, you would get more. You overbid by a TON!! 1♦ over the redouble shows nothing he is just choosing a suit.
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
#6
- Group: Members
- Posts: 38
- Joined: 2009-October-15
Posted 2010-March-25, 18:21
Hmm, that is quite interesting.
Evidently I misunderstood something.
So it is most commonly played that a new suit after XX promise nothing?
I can understand the logic if this is the case.
But I thought it is similar to a takeout being covered by a suit-- here there's no doubt that he can pass if he has nothing. I think in my previous posts there is one which I described more or less the same problem after a new suit instead of XX.
Anyway, now that I know 1D promises nothing I won't be bidding 5D in this auction next time.
Evidently I misunderstood something.
So it is most commonly played that a new suit after XX promise nothing?
I can understand the logic if this is the case.
But I thought it is similar to a takeout being covered by a suit-- here there's no doubt that he can pass if he has nothing. I think in my previous posts there is one which I described more or less the same problem after a new suit instead of XX.
Anyway, now that I know 1D promises nothing I won't be bidding 5D in this auction next time.
#7
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 4,615
- Joined: 2003-February-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:Las Vegas, USA
Posted 2010-March-25, 18:35
allfail, on Mar 26 2010, 12:21 AM, said:
Hmm, that is quite interesting.
Evidently I misunderstood something.
So it is most commonly played that a new suit after XX promise nothing?
I can understand the logic if this is the case.
But I thought it is similar to a takeout being covered by a suit-- here there's no doubt that he can pass if he has nothing. I think in my previous posts there is one which I described more or less the same problem after a new suit instead of XX.
Anyway, now that I know 1D promises nothing I won't be bidding 5D in this auction next time.
Evidently I misunderstood something.
So it is most commonly played that a new suit after XX promise nothing?
I can understand the logic if this is the case.
But I thought it is similar to a takeout being covered by a suit-- here there's no doubt that he can pass if he has nothing. I think in my previous posts there is one which I described more or less the same problem after a new suit instead of XX.
Anyway, now that I know 1D promises nothing I won't be bidding 5D in this auction next time.
Strategy for bidding over a RDBL of partner's takeout DBL is an interesting topic that I won't get into here except to say that (in the USA at least) bidding a new suit (especially the cheapest new suit) should be interpretted as meaning nothing more than "if I have to play something DBLed, I would rather play here".
In other words, it promises nothing.
But aside from that, I suspect you might have been able to save yourself if you had seen the explanation of your 5D bid before you made it. Probably it contained something like "28+ total points". Of course this is absurd from a bridge point of view, but this sort of "thinking" is one of GIB's most serious flaws.
In general, if you see that a bid you are about to make will suggest that you have a massive number of points that you don't really have, you should seriously consider not making that bid (because there is a good chance that your GIB partner will do something crazy if you do).
Sorry about this inconvenience. We would really like to fix this class of problems but it is more complicated than you might think.
Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com
#8
- Group: Admin
- Posts: 22,136
- Joined: 2004-August-21
- Gender:Male
Posted 2010-March-26, 00:33
This discussion comes up from time to time in the General Bridge Discussion forum
A takeout double says, "I have support for all the other suits. Bid your longest suit, so we can hopefully play in our best fit." If there's an intervening suit bid, this demand is cancelled, because it's no worse to let the opponents play a part score than for us to go down in a part score.
But if there's a redouble, you can't let them play there. Even if you have a stack in opener's suit, the opponents have the majority of the strength and will probably be able to take 7 tricks. And if they make an overtrick, it's a disaster.
Since it's so unlikely that you'll want to pass the redouble for penalty, few pairs play this. A more useful agreement, and I think the default in the US, is that passing means "I don't have a strong preference", passing the decision of which suit to play in back to the doubler. It's similar to a responsive double.
And if advancer jumps, it only shows extra length, not extra values like it would if there had been no redouble. Unless an opponent has psyched, partner CAN'T have much in the way of values, so there's not much point in having bids that show what someone can't have.
A takeout double says, "I have support for all the other suits. Bid your longest suit, so we can hopefully play in our best fit." If there's an intervening suit bid, this demand is cancelled, because it's no worse to let the opponents play a part score than for us to go down in a part score.
But if there's a redouble, you can't let them play there. Even if you have a stack in opener's suit, the opponents have the majority of the strength and will probably be able to take 7 tricks. And if they make an overtrick, it's a disaster.
Since it's so unlikely that you'll want to pass the redouble for penalty, few pairs play this. A more useful agreement, and I think the default in the US, is that passing means "I don't have a strong preference", passing the decision of which suit to play in back to the doubler. It's similar to a responsive double.
And if advancer jumps, it only shows extra length, not extra values like it would if there had been no redouble. Unless an opponent has psyched, partner CAN'T have much in the way of values, so there's not much point in having bids that show what someone can't have.
Page 1 of 1