[calm01]

http://tinyurl.com/7btzcpa

If simulations give this kind of result perhaps the minimal number of simulations need to be trebled.

If necessary get faster servers.

[cloa513]

calm01, on 2011-December-15, 19:06, said:

http://tinyurl.com/7btzcpa

If simulations give this kind of result perhaps the minimal number of simulations need to be trebled.

If necessary get faster servers.

Its probably the definition of 1♣,(),-,(),1♠ or 1NT (is that stronger than 17HCP) that needs to be improved- 1♠ should indicate 4♣ at least and a good hand so 2♣ is an easy bid. North has no easy choices over 1♥ I guess reasonable is 1NT.

[georgi]

calm01, on 2011-December-15, 19:06, said:

http://tinyurl.com/7btzcpa

If simulations give this kind of result perhaps the minimal number of simulations need to be trebled.

If necessary get faster servers.

Actually, GIB never passes over 1♠ if simulates.

It looks like basic GIB where the default call is pass in this case.

Anyway it will be considered the 1♠ rebid improvement where if the information is more appropriate, the default call could be more reasonable.

And why should 1♠ promising definitely a strong hand? What's the difference between reopening double here and 1♠. More likely it should be a hand with 3-4♥ where it's rather impossible partner to have penalty pass after.

It doesn't look like often event
1X - 1Y - Pass ( with not passed hand ) - Pass
Pass - to be the final auction.

[Bbradley62]

Sorry, Georgi, but I don't understand what you are telling us. Are you saying that it is right for North to pass and have South play in an expected 4-1 fit?

[Bbradley62]

It was IMPs, in case that's relevant... Here's a different response by North...

---

[Bbradley62]

Sitting South, GIB makes a different balancing bid. What in the world is that opening lead?

---

[Bbradley62]

And this even-more-bizarre lead...

---

[Bbradley62]

This is what happens when GIB sits both North and South:

---

[cloa513]

georgi, on 2011-December-16, 00:50, said:

Actually, GIB never passes over 1♠ if simulates.

It looks like basic GIB where the default call is pass in this case.

Anyway it will be considered the 1♠ rebid improvement where if the information is more appropriate, the default call could be more reasonable.

And why should 1♠ promising definitely a strong hand? What's the difference between reopening double here and 1♠. More likely it should be a hand with 3-4♥ where it's rather impossible partner to have penalty pass after.

It doesn't look like often event
1X - 1Y - Pass ( with not passed hand ) - Pass
Pass - to be the final auction.

1 ♠ should be intermediate two suit hand which is OK to play in 4-3 spades, this hand is too strong better to use X.

[xxhong]

This 2D to show 11 + points is a huge nonsense. It should show 6-10. With 11+, responder usually can bid 2D directly.

Bbradley62, on 2011-December-16, 07:23, said:

It was IMPs, in case that's relevant... Here's a different response by North...

---

[xxhong]

This 3C to show 8- is also a huge nonsense. 2S shows at least good 18 or more.
So 3C should show 5-. Anything stronger should force to game.

Bbradley62, on 2011-December-16, 07:31, said:

This is what happens when GIB sits both North and South:

---

[xxhong]

This 3D to show 9+ is also very very wrong. Facing a strong jumpshfit, 3D should be gameforcing and show 6+.

The conclusion is that the whole design of the bidding is simply bad.

Bbradley62, on 2011-December-16, 07:26, said:

Sitting South, GIB makes a different balancing bid. What in the world is that opening lead?

---

[barmar]

xxhong, on 2011-December-16, 13:18, said:

This 2D to show 11 + points is a huge nonsense. It should show 6-10. With 11+, responder usually can bid 2D directly.

There's no entry in the bidding DB for this sequence (where N passes the first time and then bids on his own the second time). So it ended up using the rule for the non-passed hand case to determine what North was showing.

As I've mentioned in other threads, GIB isn't generally able to factor in what a player has denied when showing the description of a later bid.

[Bbradley62]

barmar, on 2011-December-16, 23:25, said:

There's no entry in the bidding DB for this sequence (where N passes the first time and then bids on his own the second time). So it ended up using the rule for the non-passed hand case to determine what North was showing.

Does this mean (a) this will be added to the to-do list (without necessarily specifying priority), or (b) this is simply a feature of GIB that has to stay the way it is?

I think it is worth noting that NorthGIB figured out that it was right to bid 3♦ with 8 total points despite this description problem.

[Bbradley62]

xxhong, on 2011-December-16, 13:19, said:

This 3C to show 8- is also a huge nonsense. 2S shows at least good 18 or more. So 3C should show 5-. Anything stronger should force to game.

The 3C description is what it is because 2♠ is described as 16-22 total points. It seems to me that it's the 2♠ description that you're objecting to.

[barmar]

Bbradley62, on 2011-December-17, 09:42, said:

I think it is worth noting that NorthGIB figured out that it was right to bid 3♦ with 8 total points despite this description problem.

The North that bid 3♦ was a human.

[Bbradley62]

barmar, on 2011-December-19, 09:32, said:

The North that bid 3♦ was a human.

Ah, good point...

[xxhong]

Of course it's wrong. There is no point to play 2S to show 16+, with 16 to 18, 1S would do the job.

Bbradley62, on 2011-December-17, 09:44, said:

The 3C description is what it is because 2♠ is described as 16-22 total points. It seems to me that it's the 2♠ description that you're objecting to.

[cloa513]

xxhong, on 2011-December-19, 15:19, said:

Of course it's wrong. There is no point to play 2S to show 16+, with 16 to 18, 1S would do the job.

Unless the hand is has strength focused on two suits- with length especially in clubs 6+ and spades and you could make game with a whole lot less so the total points is much greater than 16 HCP.

[xxhong]

The basic idea is that if partner holds spades and passed, he must hold a rather weak hand. So it make no sense at all to bid 2S with 16 total points. A lot hands would show 16 total points, like KJxx xx x AKQxxx, bidding 2S here is simply maniac. Offering this hand to any expert panels, very few would suggest 2S here.

cloa513, on 2011-December-19, 19:18, said:

Unless the hand is has strength focused on two suits- with length especially in clubs 6+ and spades and you could make game with a whole lot less so the total points is much greater than 16 HCP.