[ArtK78]

Someone is going to have to explain to me GIB's failure to raise on this auction:

http://tinyurl.com/kbpw886

[1eyedjack]

---

Ouch.

I think that you were a little unlucky. Give South something like
S:Axxx
H:Ax
D:J
C:QJxxxx

and 3NT is a better contract than 4S. Granted that 3S would possibly be something of an overbid with that hand, but I have not really thought hard about constructing a better example.

Congrats to GIB for the defence. A few versions back and it would not even lead a Diamond.

[steve2005]

1eyedjack, on 2015-April-28, 06:42, said:

Granted that 3S would possibly be something of an overbid with that hand,

ArtK73 has 19 support pts with solid spades not an overbid. If anything it is an underbid

[1eyedjack]

steve2005, on 2015-April-28, 06:48, said:

ArtK73 has 19 support pts with solid spades not an overbid. If anything it is an underbid

You misread my post. I was suggesting that 3S might be considered an overbid holding the alternative South which I hypothesised that North might be simulating, and on which 3N is a superior spot.

[steve2005]

steve2005, on 2015-April-28, 06:48, said:

ArtK73 has 19 support pts with solid spades not an overbid. If anything it is an underbid

Your example is 2♠ bid. I think opener should bid 4♠ not 3 and if Gib doesnt have 4 tough it shouldn't be doing neg double on xxx or Jxx,

[1eyedjack]

steve2005, on 2015-April-28, 11:00, said:

Your example is 2♠ bid.

Indeed. As I acknowledged at the time. That is broadly what is meant by saying that 3S is "something of an overbid". I was being lazy. Modifying it to make it more suitable for 3S is I think pretty trivial.

[aguahombre]

It seems neither the North bot nor the East bot is programmed to raise partner's suit.

[Bbradley62]

1eyedjack, on 2015-April-28, 06:42, said:

Congrats to GIB for the defence. A few versions back and it would not even lead a Diamond.

I don't think there has been any deliberate modification in GIB's leads in the past few versions.

[lycier]

I'd find that Gib is becoming more and more smart,for north Gib,bidding 3nt with 4432 balanced shape still shows its choice of keeping the balance.

If opener hold 4333- flat shape,as a choice of game,3nt is better than 4♠ for sure.
I have to say this is a great progress,congratulations to bbo.

[aguahombre]

lycier, on 2015-April-29, 01:32, said:

I'd find that Gib is becoming more and more smart,for north Gib,bidding 3nt with 4432 balanced shape still shows its choice of keeping the balance.

If opener hold 4333- flat shape,as a choice of game,3nt is better than 4♠ for sure.
I have to say this is a great progress,congratulations to bbo.

The problem I see with this alleged logic is that it doesn't give a choice of games because Opener doesn't know about the choice; Responder hasn't shown four Spades. Gib is just making stuff up; some call it masterminding. It isn't hand-hogging because the human victim has to play it anyway.

[1eyedjack]

There comes a point where you are forced into a masterminding corner. He could conceal the Spade support (having already promised 3, mind), or he could show the spade support and in the process conceal the fact that his support comprises 4 vomit along with 4333 shape and 1.5 guards in the opponent's suit. Either decision might be accused of masterminding - when it fails.

I think there is a case for North bidding 2N rather than X on the previous round. I think that there is a case for X promising 4-4 in the majors. And I think that there is a case for the auction exactly as it happened.

[aguahombre]

Yes, but Double did not promise 4-4 in the majors. Your point about not doubling at all has meaning here; if the critter didn't want to find a 4-4 spade fit, why did it bother?

[lycier]

aguahombre, on 2015-April-29, 01:44, said:

The problem I see with this alleged logic is that it doesn't give a choice of games because Opener doesn't know about the choice; Responder hasn't shown four Spades. Gib is just making stuff up; some call it masterminding. It isn't hand-hogging because the human victim has to play it anyway.

It is reasonable for what you said.For me,3nt is a acceptable choice of game.
For example: if opener holding 4333 shape,opponents silent,it goes:
1♣ - 1♦ - 1♠
Does 1♠ show balance or unbalance?the current system can't show it.This is a weakness.
We should know opener should bid 1nt showing balanced hand if play walsh.
I have found that Gib of 33 version have made many beneficial attempts on both of balance and choice of games,hoping that Gib continues to have some tries towards this respect.
Good job,Gib !

[1eyedjack]

aguahombre, on 2015-April-29, 03:06, said:

Yes, but Double did not promise 4-4 in the majors. Your point about not doubling at all has meaning here; if the critter didn't want to find a 4-4 spade fit, why did it bother?

I suppose that there is an outside chance that opener may wish to convert the double? Clutching at straws.

[iandayre]

1eyedjack, on 2015-April-29, 02:41, said:

There comes a point where you are forced into a masterminding corner. He could conceal the Spade support (having already promised 3, mind), or he could show the spade support and in the process conceal the fact that his support comprises 4 vomit along with 4333 shape and 1.5 guards in the opponent's suit. Either decision might be accused of masterminding - when it fails.

I think there is a case for North bidding 2N rather than X on the previous round. I think that there is a case for X promising 4-4 in the majors. And I think that there is a case for the auction exactly as it happened.

You are correct that GIB currently promises at least 3 in both majors in this auction. But this is not good bridge. The negative double can be short in one major IF it also contains good support for opener's Club suit. The same is true after a 1D opening and 2C overcall with D support.

[1eyedjack]

Purely of academic interest, really, but compare and contrast GIB's excellent technique in the Diamond suit in the hand at the head of this thread, with its inept performance with the Heart suit here:

---

OK, South had to misplay at trick 2 to give them a chance. Arguably the play of C:J at trick 1 by East was a misplay, costly (ie if South plays on Diamonds at trick 2) but perhaps forgivable.

And here, same hand, but misplay was at trick 1

---

This was an Instant (MP) tourney, so probably an earlier version of GIB.

West's decision not to lead a low Heart at trick 1 at these tables didn't make the defence any easier, despite that they could have recovered. I wouldn't expect many humans to lead a Club.

At my table I stopped in 3D after the same start, which did not score well despite making on the nose, because so many were making 3N.