[cicus]

fred, on Sep 4 2005, 09:40 AM, said:

badderzboy, on Sep 4 2005, 12:33 PM, said:

Fred, have you thought of creating a web-page in Bridgebase where standard cards can be downloaded ?

Yes, we will certainly create such a web page (and also make it possible to download various FD files through BBO itself).

I am not sure if members of the BBO staff and going to get involved in creating these files themselves. I hope that groups of volunteers will form for this purpose.

However, FD is still too young to start a project like that. The file format could still change and the program needs more testing until I am confident that it is stable enough to be used for a major project (like creating an SAYC file for example).

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Hi Fred,

I have already typed in a great part of our pretty complex convention card so if you change the file format for FD could you please find a way so that I don't have to input all the data again? If not I'd better stop right now...

Best wishes,
Gábor

[stev_hav]

cicus, on Sep 15 2005, 08:55 AM, said:

I have already typed in a great part of our pretty complex convention card so if you change the file format for FD could you please find a way so that I don't have to input all the data again? If not I'd better stop right now...

Best wishes,
Gábor

Have you completed enough of the keying to be able to estimate your final record count?

I have just begun working on a comparable file, based upon "BBO Standard - Basic". All that I'm attempting to do, at this time, is record sequences beginning with 1c and 1d. I have keyed what appear to be the higher-frequency uncontested auctions, including "only some" of the more-likely slam-try sequences.

It appears that, after suit agreement and using standard Blackwood, there are at least 55 logical sub-sequences from 4nt onward. (4 possible replies, after which asker may sign off, bid slam, or continue with 5nt . . ). And, that there are "quite a few" suit-agreement sequences, in which one partner is unlimited and may logically ask for aces. (Single raise, 2+ jump raises, 3 possible splinters, raise followed by cue bid/s, etc). In all likelihood, several thousand uncontested slam-try sequences.

Not to mention possible competition. Each combination of opposing actions--even assuming that opponents subside below 3nt--would generate an additional copy of "all logical uncontested" sequences.

It is "far from obvious", to me, that it would be truly feasible to make use of--let alone record--a file consisting of one record for each reasonably-forseeable auction. It would seem advisable to--in the relatively-near future--estimate the "maximum feasible" file size . .

[cicus]

stev_hav, on Sep 15 2005, 06:29 AM, said:

cicus, on Sep 15 2005, 08:55 AM, said:

I have already typed in a great part of our pretty complex convention card so if you change the file format for FD could you please find a way so that I don't have to input all the data again? If not I'd better stop right now...

Best wishes,
Gábor

Have you completed enough of the keying to be able to estimate your final record count?

I have just begun working on a comparable file, based upon "BBO Standard - Basic". All that I'm attempting to do, at this time, is record sequences beginning with 1c and 1d. I have keyed what appear to be the higher-frequency uncontested auctions, including "only some" of the more-likely slam-try sequences.

It appears that, after suit agreement and using standard Blackwood, there are at least 55 logical sub-sequences from 4nt onward. (4 possible replies, after which asker may sign off, bid slam, or continue with 5nt . . ). And, that there are "quite a few" suit-agreement sequences, in which one partner is unlimited and may logically ask for aces. (Single raise, 2+ jump raises, 3 possible splinters, raise followed by cue bid/s, etc). In all likelihood, several thousand uncontested slam-try sequences.

Not to mention possible competition. Each combination of opposing actions--even assuming that opponents subside below 3nt--would generate an additional copy of "all logical uncontested" sequences.

It is "far from obvious", to me, that it would be truly feasible to make use of--let alone record--a file consisting of one record for each reasonably-forseeable auction. It would seem advisable to--in the relatively-near future--estimate the "maximum feasible" file size . .

I am a little bit scared by what you wrote. I have keyed in about the first 4 rounds of our most important bidding sequences. The file size is 15kbyte now. I have not yet bypassed 3NT...
We use a bit complicated relay big club system. The same bid always denotes the same hand type, only the suits vary. E.g. 5422 is always shown by 3♠. I don't think I will include these 'moduls' in the file because then I will have to repeat the same key sequence 20 times. Even if I use copy and paste it is not easy because suits have to be altered in the explanation fields.
Still, it is useful to complete this CC: while I'm doing it I memorize the system.

[hrothgar]

cicus, on Sep 15 2005, 03:56 PM, said:

We use a bit complicated relay big club system. The same bid always denotes the same hand type, only the suits vary. E.g. 5422 is always shown by 3♠. I don't think I will include these 'moduls' in the file because then I will have to repeat the same key sequence 20 times. Even if I use copy and paste it is not easy because suits have to be altered in the explanation fields.
Still, it is useful to complete this CC: while I'm doing it I memorize the system.

I'm running into precisely the same situation with my own Symmetric Relay methods.

As I noted in an earlier posting, its unclear to me whether the GUI that Fred provided is necessarily the best way to propagate system files for systems based on relay methods. Personally, I I find the option of using some kind of script to automate the process is MUCH more appealing. Long term, I expect that we'll see a variety of different mechanisms that can be used to edit these files.

However, none of this "work" will be possible until Fred has a chance to finalize the file format. Ideally, I hope that he'll also have time to provide some documentation.

In the mean time, I'm having fun playing arround with what we have available today..

[badderzboy]

I agree with Richard, its been great fun playing with the tool and when you get more convoluted sequences trying to figure out what they should mean has been a real eye-opener and a great learning curve...

Fred has suggested that a conversion tool would be available if the format changes as he appreciates how much work people have done in advance.

One thought I did have was a seperate forum for each standard .bss file developed for BBO when Fred asks for help to discuss any contentious sequences to get a common view?

For example
1C-1S-2D-2H vs 1C-1S-2D-3H what should the jump mean if anything or is it an impossible bid and the answer may be different for ACOL than SAYC or BBO Advanced?

Steve

[DrTodd13]

If a sequence comes up at the table that you haven't provided an explanation for in FD, it would be nice if BBO would bring up the FD window for that sequence and allow you to enter the information at that time and then save it. In this way, you could build up the system over time rather than doing it all at once. I too share hrothgar's concern about relay systems. It isn't easy at all.

[PMetsch]

Hi Fred,

I think I found a minor bug in FD. If I enter the following line in FD then wrapping in the description field of the pop-up box goes wrong:

FG, 4+♣, may have 5-6 ♦ or 4441♦♥

The part "4441♦♥" should appear on the second line, but it doesn't. Other descriptions are wrapping correct. I think it doesn't wrap, because the first character is numerical.

EDIT: have done some experiments: it is the suit symbol at the end of the line, that causes the problem.

[Gerben42]

Hi, I've defined my opening bids for 1st and 2nd seat but now I can't enter 3rd and 4th seat... This seems to be a bug.

Ah found a relevant post further up, will try that.

This post has been edited by Gerben42: 2005-September-16, 04:26

[PMetsch]

Hi Fred,

Another small problem:

If you define 1NT-2NT as a transfer, save the file, stop FD, and restart FD again, then the disposition of 2NT is changed to "signoff" and in the description field a 0 (zero) is added at the first position.

[fred]

DrTodd13, on Sep 15 2005, 05:51 PM, said:

If a sequence comes up at the table that you haven't provided an explanation for in FD, it would be nice if BBO would bring up the FD window for that sequence and allow you to enter the information at that time and then save it. In this way, you could build up the system over time rather than doing it all at once. I too share hrothgar's concern about relay systems. It isn't easy at all.

This feature is already part of the plan.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

PS Happy Birthday!

[PMetsch]

Hi Fred,

Another small problem:

I have 1♣ - 1♥ - 1NT defined as a relay (disposition). If I save, stop FD and start FD, then diposition is changed to signoff and a 2 is added at the first position of the description. Probably the same problem as the transfer problem.

[fred]

PMetsch, on Sep 16 2005, 01:24 PM, said:

Hi Fred,

Another small problem:

I have 1♣ - 1♥ - 1NT defined as a relay (disposition). If I save, stop FD and start FD, then diposition is changed to signoff and a 2 is added at the first position of the description. Probably the same problem as the transfer problem.

I cannot seem to replicate this problem. Is it possible that you have more than one version of FD on your PC and an old version is messing this up?

Is anyone else having trouble with the new dispositions?

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[david_c]

The new dispositions are nice. Though there are still a few bids that don't have an obvious disposition to me - I'm wondering what disposition people are using for:

• a natural opening bid (is this "non-forcing" or "constructive"?)
  
• 2♣:2♦ waiting / negative. Similarly 1♣:1♦ in Polish.
  
• the completion of a transfer
  
• a response to Blackwood (or to any other convention with defined responses)
  
• a natural bid in an already game-forcing situtation (e.g. 1♠:2♦,2♥ playing 2/1)

[PMetsch]

fred, on Sep 16 2005, 09:28 AM, said:

PMetsch, on Sep 16 2005, 01:24 PM, said:

Hi Fred,

Another small problem:

I have 1♣ - 1♥ - 1NT defined as a relay (disposition). If I save, stop FD and start FD, then diposition is changed to signoff and a 2 is added at the first position of the description. Probably the same problem as the transfer problem.

I cannot seem to replicate this problem. Is it possible that you have more than one version of FD on your PC and an old version is messing this up?

Is anyone else having trouble with the new dispositions?

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

I have only 1 version, bidedit (1.07) in c:\program files\full disclosure. I have always upgraded it with every new version.

This are my settings bidedit:

[SETTINGS]
CONSTRUCTIVE=Y
WE_OPEN=Y
TOOLTIPS=Y
WINDOW_LEFT=403
WINDOW_TOP=126
DEFINE_DIALOG_LEFT=425
DEFINE_DIALOG_TOP=209
[BOOKMARK]
FILE_NAME=babylon.bss
FILE_PATH=C:\Documents and Settings\Peter\Mijn documenten\games\bridge\bieden\systemen\babylon.bss
AUCTION=001CP1HP1NP
[BACKGROUND_COLORS]
<<<< snipped >>>>

It is the sequence: (vul any, dealer any)
(pass) - (pass) - (pass) - 1♣;
pass - 1♥ - pass - 1NT

1NT is the only defined bid after the 1♥ response.

EDIT: added the system

babylon.bss

<<<< snipped >>>>
001C=YYYYYYY50815+ HCP, ANY
001CP1D=YYYYYYY5080-8 HCP
001CP1H=NYYYYYY648FG, 4+!H, may have longer !C/!D
001CP1HP1N=YYYYYYY12®
<<<< snipped >>>>

[PMetsch]

Hi Fred,

Have done some experiments. I think the problem is the number of dispositions. The new dispositions are saved as "10", "11", "12" etc. When the file is read again after startup, FD only reads the first postion so "1" and the rest "0", "1", "2" is read as description.

[fred]

david_c, on Sep 16 2005, 03:01 PM, said:

The new dispositions are nice. Though there are still a few bids that don't have an obvious disposition to me - I'm wondering what disposition people are using for:

• a natural opening bid (is this "non-forcing" or "constructive"?)
  
• 2♣:2♦ waiting / negative. Similarly 1♣:1♦ in Polish.
  
• the completion of a transfer
  
• a response to Blackwood (or to any other convention with defined responses)
  
• a natural bid in an already game-forcing situtation (e.g. 1♠:2♦,2♥ playing 2/1)

I am thinking of adding dispositions of "asking bid" and "response to asking bid" for handling things like Blackwood and responses to Blackwood.

I personally think that "non-forcing" is the best way to describe something like a 1H opening bid, but I suppose "constructive" is also OK (though I did not have this purpose in mind when I created this disposition).

I actually have no idea what relay/puppet/transfer are supposed to mean (or if any of these are actually well-defined anywhere).

As has been suggested in other posts, the people who get involved in creating system files that will be used widely on BBO should make decisions involving standards for describing various types of bids. I will be happy to offer my opinions about such things, but this is not exactly my area of expertise.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[david_c]

PMetsch, on Sep 16 2005, 04:44 PM, said:

Hi Fred,

Have done some experiments. I think the problem is the number of dispositions. The new dispositions are saved as "10", "11", "12" etc. When the file is read again after startup, FD only reads the first postion so "1" and the rest "0", "1", "2" is read as description.

Aha! Yes, I can get it to do this too now, but it only happens for NT bids. For suits it saves correctly, with "A" in place of "10" and so on.

[fred]

Thanks! I will fix this and make a new version.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[david_c]

Obvious bug in 1.0.8 - the final three dispositions should be

"Relay"
"Asking bid"
"Asking bid response"

but instead they are

"RelayAsking bidAsking bid response"
""
""

Edited: and the no-trump dispositions are all messed up now.

Edited again: Don't use this version on an important file until Fred fixes it, as it will make all your no-trump dispositions wrong.

[cherdano]

fred, on Sep 16 2005, 05:45 PM, said:

I actually have no idea what relay/puppet/transfer are supposed to mean (or if any of these are actually well-defined anywhere).

Me neither, but instead of trying to ask people, I may try to give definitions so people can tell me what is wrong with them

* Relay: The cheapest possible bid as an asking bid, not promising anything except ability to handle all (automatic) responses (and in the context of an auction where several such cheapest-bid-is-asking-bid can follow each other). I.e., as for disposition, it is just an asking bid.
* Puppet: Asking partner to bid the next step (exceptions allowed) without implying length in this suit/strain (2♣ in XYZ)
* Transfer: Asking partner to bid the next step (exceptions allowed), showing a hand that wants to play in this strain