Help
IMPs, in case it matters... same board, two tables. My West gave count when East cashed ♣KA; Pablo's West upside-downed it. My East did not give West his ruff, but Pablo's East did. What's up with that? Yes, Pablo bid ♦, so a ♦ return was less likely to be helpful at his table, but shouldn't East be looking for (and shouldn't West be giving) count signals on Tricks 2 and 3 at both tables?
Page 1 of 1
Upside Down Count?
#1
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 6,542
- Joined: 2010-February-01
- Gender:Male
- Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA
Posted 2012-January-21, 10:52
IMPs, in case it matters... same board, two tables. My West gave count when East cashed ♣KA; Pablo's West upside-downed it. My East did not give West his ruff, but Pablo's East did. What's up with that? Yes, Pablo bid ♦, so a ♦ return was less likely to be helpful at his table, but shouldn't East be looking for (and shouldn't West be giving) count signals on Tricks 2 and 3 at both tables?
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,529
- Joined: 2008-December-02
Posted 2012-January-21, 20:27
Bbradley62, on 2012-January-21, 10:52, said:
IMPs, in case it matters... same board, two tables. My West gave count when East cashed ♣KA; Pablo's West upside-downed it. My East did not give West his ruff, but Pablo's East did. What's up with that? Yes, Pablo bid ♦, so a ♦ return was less likely to be helpful at his table, but shouldn't East be looking for (and shouldn't West be giving) count signals on Tricks 2 and 3 at both tables?
GIB can't understand signals.
#3
- Group: Admin
- Posts: 22,038
- Joined: 2004-August-21
- Gender:Male
Posted 2012-January-23, 16:46
GIB does usually give count signals, I'm not sure why it was inconsistent on this hand.
It does try to read signals, but it's not very good at it. It doesn't have a memory that recognizes "it played high then low, it must have a doubleton". Rather, when it's dealing hands in a simulation, it compares partner's previous plays with what it thinks would be normal, and uses this to sort the hands into more and less likely. So after a high-low, there should be more hands with doubleton used in the simulation. But that still doesn't guarantee that it will come to the right conclusion about how to defend.
It does try to read signals, but it's not very good at it. It doesn't have a memory that recognizes "it played high then low, it must have a doubleton". Rather, when it's dealing hands in a simulation, it compares partner's previous plays with what it thinks would be normal, and uses this to sort the hands into more and less likely. So after a high-low, there should be more hands with doubleton used in the simulation. But that still doesn't guarantee that it will come to the right conclusion about how to defend.
Page 1 of 1