[baraka]

One of the worst thing I hate about GIB is that it sometimes make a bad bid and then takes capitancy and drives the ship right on the rocks ! Here is a perfect example...

---

GIB has a minimum... makes beleive it has more by bidding ♠s then drives the ship like the Costa Concordia. Miserable !!!

By the way... How do I make the hand diagram bigger ?

This post has been edited by baraka: 2014-June-22, 11:22

[Bbradley62]

---

I'm posting something in the Support forum to see if they can do something about dimensions in the media command.

[1eyedjack]

yes the 3S bid is beyond Salvador Dali, and into the realms of Tracey Emin.

Whatever you think of the announced description of 3S, north is not 1 but 2 HCP, AND 2 TP, short of minimum requirements, which is a wide range as it is.

My method of posting hand diagrams is to copy the URL to the clipboard, and paste it into Notepad.

then I remove the initial string prior to "sn=1eyedjack"

Then I add "[hv=" to the beginning

Then I add "]400|300[/h v]" to the end. BUT exclude the space between "h v"

Then re-copy to clipboard and paste into forum.

The "400|300" bit specifies the diagram size. You can change that.

Without doubt there must be an easier way.

[baraka]

 1eyedjack, on 2014-June-22, 10:00, said:

yes the 3S bid is beyond Salvador Dali, and into the realms of Tracey Emin.

Whatever you think of the announced description of 3S, north is not 1 but 2 HCP, AND 2 TP, short of minimum requirements, which is a wide range as it is.

My method of posting hand diagrams is to copy the URL to the clipboard, and paste it into Notepad.

then I remove the initial string prior to "sn=1eyedjack"

Then I add "[hv=" to the beginning

Then I add "]400|300[/h v]" to the end. BUT exclude the space between "h v"

Then re-copy to clipboard and paste into forum.

The "400|300" bit specifies the diagram size. You can change that.


Without doubt there must be an easier way.

I see this at the beginning...

handviewer.html?lin=pn|baraka


Is it sn or pn ?

[1eyedjack]

 baraka, on 2014-June-22, 10:37, said:

I see this at the beginning...

handviewer.html?lin=pn|baraka


Is it sn or pn ?

OK in your case it should start

[hv=lin=pn|baraka.....

so kill all up to the "?" inclusive and replace with "[hv="

[baraka]

 1eyedjack, on 2014-June-22, 10:57, said:

OK in your case it should start

[hv=lin=pn|baraka.....

so kill all up to the "?" inclusive and replace with "[hv="

Thx. Got to remove [media] also at the end.

[Bbradley62]

There's no need for the clipboard... you can copy the URL into forum Reply/Post box and do the editing directly there.

[1eyedjack]

OK, TEST

---

Yes that seems to work. For some reason I had it into my head that it pasted the URL as a hyperlink, and thought that would not be editable easily. Clearly I was wrong. Thanks. Cuts out a step.

[Bbradley62]

nice choice of hand! don't ya love the claim button?

[baraka]

Here's an other example of captancy problem, although I must admit that I pushed this one intentionaly just to see ...

---

GIB's bid should be 4♥ (nothing else to say) on 4♦ and not 4NT and let me take charge if need be ! He has already shown me maximum value by bidding 4♣. By bidding 4NT he is taking captancy and no one having limited his hand in such a narrow way should be aloud to take control !

[Bbradley62]

But YOU have limited your hand to 18-19HCP, and have specified that you have a balanced hand with exactly three hearts.

 baraka, on 2014-June-23, 14:48, said:

... no one having limited his hand in such a narrow way should be aloud [sic] to take control !

[1eyedjack]

The OP admitted that his 4D cue was experimental to see whether North would bite and overbid.

It is possible to construct a hand for South where slam is good opposite the given North:

S:Axx
H:AQx
D:AKQTx
C:xx

Within the context of "18-19 bal with 3 H support" this hand has considerably more playing potential than the OP South. Clearly "18-19 bal with 3 H" does not "say it all". That said, while this hand fits the parameters, I am struggling to construct another, and this suggests that North should not slam force on the strength of Aces.

There is a style question to resolve: Given that South has the Ace of Diamonds, is he obliged to show it over 4C? Alternatively would a 4H "signout" show a hand that is relatively disinterested in context but which might still hold the Ace of Diamonds?

I am not sure but I THINK that the way that GIB plays it is that 4D is a co-operative bid that shows not just the Diamond Ace but also elevated slam interest in light of the 4C cue.

Whatever the arguments on this hand, it is this style issue that is in my view the more important to resolve (a) in terms of identifying GIB current behaviour, and (b) correcting it if appropriate.

Personally I think that South should be virtually required to cue the Diamond Ace if held, which does not show particular interest beyond that. I don't see this as a Last Train scenario even if GIB played LT, given that South is limited, North (at the time of bidding 4C) is not limited, and South cannot know what would be of interest to North. Cue bids below game, especially the first cue bid by a player, should be given a wide latitude. Had North limited his hand by the time of 4C then it would be different and 4D would show more general interest.

GIB has several problems with slam bidding, among which are
1) It is willing to show a shortage but incapable of capitalising on that knowledge (not relevant on this hand)
2) It overvalues shortages in suits bid by partner (akin to item 1 above)
3) Pretty much its only slam investigative tool is RKCB (except rarely when Quant is defined). It will make a single cue bid but generally as a launch point to enter RKCB at the first opportunity. It virtually never cue bids above game (I cannot remember a single occasion).

On the OP hand I side with Baraka. The example hand that I contrived is strong enough to drive beyond 4H after North bids 4C. So North should tap out in 4H having bid 4C. This is North's last chance to limit his hand, which he has arguably already overbid with 4C.

[Bbradley62]

Yes, I agree that neither North nor South should particularly want to pursue slam. I'm objecting to OP's statement that North should let South take charge when South's hand is more well-defined than North's is.

[baraka]

North is a past hand, therefore, 11HCP max (12 TP). In front of a 19 balanced max (could have 20TP), what kind of hand could north have to pass first hand, not bid preempt first hand, and have distribution values to come up to 33 TP. Impossible. Even so, if north has that miracle hand, in front of a 19 HCP, some of those 19HCPs will most likely be lost in duplication in front of shortness. As 1eyedjack rightly mentioned, GIB fails to reduce the value of it's own hand when holding honors in a known partner short suit. I have experienced myself GIB going full speed ahead with KQxx in front of my known singleton and there lies the problem. 4♣ should never had been bid in the first place.

[Bbradley62]

 baraka, on 2014-June-25, 07:13, said:

North is a past hand, therefore, 11HCP max (12 TP). In front of a 19 balanced max (could have 20TP), what kind of hand could north have to pass first hand, not bid preempt first hand, and have distribution values to come up to 33 TP. Impossible.

This North hand isn't it, but it does exist. How about ♠x, ♥KJxxxx, ♦x, ♣AJxxx?

[baraka]

Here is an other of those WTF moment...

---

At this game, you are supposed to have confidence in your Partner. I'm loosing it and fast !!!

What is it that GIB does not understand (or I) about 4♠ ? Isn't it supposed to be to play ?

After 5♣ I went along with 5♥ telling myself he'll stop in 5♠ since he'll think we don't have control in ♦ ! Oh no... too simple !

You never know when and how he's going to throw a stick at you ! Geezzz !!!! At that rate, I'm not going to stick over here very much longer !

[johnu]

 baraka, on 2014-June-22, 09:29, said:

GIB has a minimum... makes beleive it has more by bidding ♠s then drives the ship like the Costa Concordia. Miserable !!!

I would have rebid 3NT instead of 4♣.

[baraka]

 johnu, on 2014-June-29, 15:10, said:

I would have rebid 3NT instead of 4♣.

Wiht a doubleton 96. How sweet ! You might get away with it from time to time, but in the long run it's gonna cost you !

[johnu]

 baraka, on 2014-June-30, 10:48, said:

Wiht a doubleton 96. How sweet ! You might get away with it from time to time, but in the long run it's gonna cost you !

This from the guy who got to 6♦ Opponents have supported spades. I don't know if it is officially part of the system, but GIB seems to make plenty of cue bids that look suspiciously like Western Q bids. You have flat distribution with lots of losers and only diamonds as a likely source of tricks. Partner presumably has nothing or next to nothing in spade honors, and very little in clubs since you have AK10. Do you think partner has xxx in hearts based on the bidding? If 3NT is the last makeable game contract, I don't have the hand to bypass it. Maybe partner will take us out of 3NT if it's right (sorry for the humor, I know we're playing with GIB )