[1eyedjack]

---

MP, robot tourney, best hand South
I thought that it would be cool to let partner make the final double

[TylerE]

Why on earth should N double? With WvR there is no compelling reason to talk them into running.

[1eyedjack]

TylerE, on 2013-November-05, 12:11, said:

Why on earth should N double? With WvR there is no compelling reason to talk them into running.

You are being sarcastic, I assume

[TylerE]

I really don't understand your purpose with these threads.

Guess what? When you bid like a drunk masterminding fool GIB doesn't bid very well.

[1eyedjack]

What is your problem?

I assume by your response that you were serious in your earlier post.

What was "drunk" or "masterminding" about any of my bids in the above hand? Was the 1♠ opener anything other than middle of the road?

North's double of the artificial 2♠ cue is described as "penalty". Penalty of what? 2♠? I read it as a hand that sought to penalise the opponents in at least one of the two suits indicated by the cue bidder. Which is what any human would have meant and which is what he actually held.

So I co-operate by doubling the 2NT to confirm willingness to penalise, and then by doubling the second suit shown by the overcaller (which North is happy to allow to stand). Then East, having already expressed a preference for Clubs while undoubled, reverts back to Hearts when Clubs get doubled. And you, North, have what? AQJxx of trumps. Partner has Spades and (apparently) Clubs covered, and you also have 4 cards in the remaining suit (which they would have to raise a level to run to).

And you suggest that North should not double for fear of them running, and you expect me to take any of your other comments seriously?

As for drunk masterminding, yes I freely admit that I bid against the robots in a fashion that I would not dream of in any human event. And guess what? I do very nicely out of it, thank you very much. Doesn't always work but it doesn't have to. So you may call it drunk masterminding, but I feel no shame in it if it is an effective technique.

But all of that is entirely beside the point. GIB has no memory of past events, nor has it any clue in the middle of a hand that I might be "drunk masterminding" it. It is entirely valid to ask what a reasonable GIB should do with the cards that it has been dealt on the information that it has available and to criticise the action that it actually took when it appears unreasonable with a view to improving the program.

If it were not patently obvious, and I am sure that it is to anyone other than you, the purpose of these threads is to bring to light areas in which GIB might be improved, which appears to be an ongoing project supported by BBO. It takes me no little time and effort to bring these hands to their attention.

If you find my posts in this subforum irritating then you have a simple solution at your disposal.

[HighLow21]

TylerE, on 2013-November-05, 13:44, said:

I really don't understand your purpose with these threads.

Guess what? When you bid like a drunk masterminding fool GIB doesn't bid very well.

There's no need for this.

[1eyedjack]

It doesn’t matter. Criticism that lacks any merit also lacks any impact.