[gwnn]

---

EW both made egregious errors here and it looks even stupider when both of them happen on the same board.

[Fluffy]

I wanna train with my partner in your local club if you really think this is the worst double ever.

[helene_t]

if double really shows 4+ hearts then I don't think the pull is that bad.

[cloa513]

 gwnn, on 2015-July-16, 01:49, said:

---

EW both made egregious errors here and it looks even stupider when both of them happen on the same board.

Its not such a terrible double- its assumed you were following its standard- pre-emptive raise to game. Your strong standard triple raise is at strong risk of missing a slam. If your bidding like it then East is guaranteed to void in spades.

[gordontd]

 cloa513, on 2015-July-16, 05:04, said:

Your strong standard triple raise is at strong risk of missing a slam.

Not playing in a best-hand robot game where it is known that partner's hand is not better than yours.

[cloa513]

 gordontd, on 2015-July-16, 06:51, said:

Not playing in a best-hand robot game where it is known that partner's hand is not better than yours.

How about void of diamonds, A of clubs and 6 good spades KQJxxx, J of hearts- I assume that's enough for GIB to open.

[gwnn]

It was a calculated risk. I did not claim it was the best bid ever. I was talking about the robots' idiotic decisions. In fact if I'd known how bad their doubles are I'd have bid a lot more 1M-4M's!

And if partner has a void in spades, they can find their void too and bid accordingly.

[kuhchung]

I agree with the thread title.

Nice 4S call. I'm going to start using that one. It's like we're playing a funny sort of limited opening system!

[iandayre]

As stated W's double isn't that bad. If you have your bid partner is void in S and they could easily have a good save or even a make.

It is looking like the concept of "human best hand" is distorting the bidding too much. It is not sensible bridge to be able to bid 4S with a hand like this with virtual impunity. That said, I enjoy having a decent hand each time. Perhaps the parameters should be: Human always has at least 11 HCP but then other hands are distributed randomly. That would eliminate hands like this, and the ability to open poor hands intending to pass your unpassed partner's 1 level response.

Programmers correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think this change would be too difficult for BBO to implement. And it would be an improvement to the integrity and the challenge of the game.

[gwnn]

 iandayre, on 2015-July-16, 14:31, said:

As stated W's double isn't that bad. If you have your bid partner is void in S and they could easily have a good save or even a make.

As stated, E can also count its own spade holding and bid accordingly. Well, I guess I'm pretty wrong about this since E pulled the double even with a doubleton! Are we all living on different planets? Would you really double at the table with Txx Kxx QJT AQJx? It's a 13 count but it's a pretty bad 13 count, no shape at all (it is one of these so-called four-three-three-three hands which are actually the worst shape in bridge). Or is this just the favourite pastime of the GIB robot discussion subforum "let's criticize gwnn's decisions since the GIB developers obviously can reprogram him, let's praise GIB since there's nothing the programmers can do about their decisions!"

[gwnn]

Or did someone hack this thread and the hand appears as x Kxxx QJTx AQJx (a bit pushy but I definitely wouldn't be posting about it) or the auction appears like p-p-1♠-? (a perfectly fine takeout double that only a purist would object to). I can really see no other explanation for this insistence that this hand is somehow an acceptable double. For the record, the hand is ten third, king third, queen-jack-ten, ace-queen-jack-small (I hope this will go past the hackers and not be transformed into an eighteen count while I am posting). Blink once if you got the message, blink twice if you still think double by west is acceptable -- in that case I will try smoke signals or steganography. In case the hackers are also changing the description of double, I am writing it here reversed: stniop latot erom ro neetxis ,straeh erom ro ruof. If you don't hear from me within 24 hours, please let my parents know that I was abducted by the hackers who are changing these hands for uncovering their plans.

[Bbradley62]

 iandayre, on 2015-July-16, 14:31, said:

... Perhaps the parameters should be: Human always has at least 11 HCP but then other hands are distributed randomly...

The other similar suggestion that has been made is that no more than one GIB should have more HCP than Human, rather than no GIB... Either of these would be an improvement, imo.

[cloa513]

 gwnn, on 2015-July-16, 19:58, said:

As stated, E can also count its own spade holding and bid accordingly. Well, I guess I'm pretty wrong about this since E pulled the double even with a doubleton! Are we all living on different planets? Would you really double at the table with Txx Kxx QJT AQJx? It's a 13 count but it's a pretty bad 13 count, no shape at all (it is one of these so-called four-three-three-three hands which are actually the worst shape in bridge). Or is this just the favourite pastime of the GIB robot discussion subforum "let's criticize gwnn's decisions since the GIB developers obviously can reprogram him, let's praise GIB since there's nothing the programmers can do about their decisions!"

You have supposed to have five spade- read the bid description- therefore East has no spades- no problem with shape now.

[gwnn]

Thanks, this gives a completely different spin on everything, luckily nobody has mentioned this before and I have not addressed this already twice. Also if you reply to a post that contains two questions, could you also answer them? Would you really double at the table with that garbage 13 count or are you just trying to be irritating?

[cloa513]

 gwnn, on 2015-July-17, 01:33, said:

Thanks, this gives a completely different spin on everything, luckily nobody has mentioned this before and I have not addressed this already twice. Also if you reply to a post that contains two questions, could you also answer them? Would you really double at the table with that garbage 13 count or are you just trying to be irritating?

If opponents were doing preemptive raises (as they are meant to for GIB's system) and its nonvulnerable against vulnerable, then absolutely.

[helene_t]

One problem with this strategy is that p might pull your double. I find it very difficult to predict when GIB will pull my doubles. But maybe this is the kind of doubles it never pulls, even though it doesn't promise much defense.

[gwnn]

Yea I know and I was actually not sure whether or not it will pull it but I was definitely not going to pass it out.

[steve2005]

I don't get what the discussion is about. West Gib's double is explained as takeout. Given that, East Gib isn't pulling, so is understandable. West double not great but isn't the worst ever.

[iandayre]

 Bbradley62, on 2015-July-16, 20:17, said:

The other similar suggestion that has been made is that no more than one GIB should have more HCP than Human, rather than no GIB... Either of these would be an improvement, imo.

I think it's most important that partner can have more points than you, only that will help with the issues I mentioned.

[gwnn]

 steve2005, on 2015-July-17, 07:40, said:

I don't get what the discussion is about. West Gib's double is explained as takeout. Given that, East Gib isn't pulling, so is understandable. West double not great but isn't the worst ever.

East did pull, are the hackers still changing the diagram?