BBO Discussion Forums: Partial stop - how right it was - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Partial stop - how right it was

#1 User is offline   thorvald 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 376
  • Joined: 2012-September-05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denmark

Posted 2023-January-27, 10:57



Perhaps the bot knows it's opponents, but to me 9642 opposite a shortage is not near a partial stopper, but it was :-)
Thorvald Aagaard
Mobile : +45 22 99 55 25
http://www.netbridge.dk
http://www.thorvald.dk
0

#2 User is online   smerriman 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,027
  • Joined: 2014-March-15
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2023-January-27, 13:21

GIB's definition of partial stop is length + HCP = 4. It expects you to bid on 100% of the time due to the heart shortage (GIB South isn't even allowed to *consider* passing 3NT with your hand).
A better handviewer
Reverse engineering GIB, part 1: A treatise on the insanity of bidding simulations
0

#3 User is offline   thepossum 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,568
  • Joined: 2018-July-04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 2023-January-28, 18:08

Pushing it a bit. T9xx I could accept

Sorry maybe its the difference between a partial stop and a likely stop :)
0

#4 User is offline   mcphee 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,512
  • Joined: 2003-February-16

Posted 2023-January-29, 02:29

The robots are clearly as dumb as dirt. I would have ended in 5!S as no Q of trump but the issue is 3NT is simply ridiculous.
0
Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users