Help
My link
Matchpoints, ACBL robot individual
North has an absolute minimum for its 2♠ bid, and has absolutely no justification for bidding on over South's 3♠ invitation (for which full values are in place).
My link
IMPs, ACBL robot individual
North has nothing near the 9-12 total points required for its 1♠ bid, and has no reason to rescue or try to improve the contract. But, having misbid, it honors South's "forcing" 3♦ bid when any reasonable player (having accidentally pulled the 1♠ card from the bid box and recognizing that partner is limited by his/her first round action) would pass. Note that at other tables, where South doubled and rebid 2♦ (a stronger action that South's simple overcall), North found a pass.
All too often, successful results in BBO are dependent, not on taking the right action, but on guessing which action will not provoke a destructive response from the robot.
Page 1 of 1
Guess again (and again)
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 7,786
- Joined: 2004-September-05
- Gender:Male
- Location:Galloway NJ USA
-
Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.
Posted 2015-June-04, 11:18
Cannot agree more.
#3
- VIP Member
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 6,971
- Joined: 2009-November-14
- Gender:Male
- Location:Houston, TX
Posted 2015-June-04, 14:00
uva72uva72, on 2015-June-04, 10:19, said:
All too often, successful results in BBO are dependent, not on taking the right action, but on guessing which action will not provoke a destructive response from the robot.
All too often people make subjective analysis like this unfortunately.
As much as I agree in your 2nd link that 3 NT is awful, I have to say 1♦ and 3♦ are equally awful if not worse. But lets agree to disagree about your bidding since it is hard to prove anything to anyone about bidding. However, bad bid by pd is never a good excuse to misplay the hand. See, if you played the hand correctly, you would achieve the same score with those who played 3♦, since it is also down 1. At least you would have avoided -200 which is awful score at MP. At IMP 3 imps not something we like to throw away.
What purpose did you think it will serve to cover the ♠ T?
"Genius has its own limitations, however stupidity has no such boundaries!"
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"
"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"
"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."
#4
- Group: Admin
- Posts: 5,168
- Joined: 2009-July-26
- Gender:Female
- Location:bucharest / romania
Posted 2015-June-04, 23:31
MrAce, on 2015-June-04, 14:00, said:
All too often people make subjective analysis like this unfortunately.
As much as I agree in your 2nd link that 3 NT is awful, I have to say 1♦ and 3♦ are equally awful if not worse. But lets agree to disagree about your bidding since it is hard to prove anything to anyone about bidding. However, bad bid by pd is never a good excuse to misplay the hand. See, if you played the hand correctly, you would achieve the same score with those who played 3♦, since it is also down 1. At least you would have avoided -200 which is awful score at MP. At IMP 3 imps not something we like to throw away.
What purpose did you think it will serve to cover the ♠ T?
As much as I agree in your 2nd link that 3 NT is awful, I have to say 1♦ and 3♦ are equally awful if not worse. But lets agree to disagree about your bidding since it is hard to prove anything to anyone about bidding. However, bad bid by pd is never a good excuse to misplay the hand. See, if you played the hand correctly, you would achieve the same score with those who played 3♦, since it is also down 1. At least you would have avoided -200 which is awful score at MP. At IMP 3 imps not something we like to throw away.
What purpose did you think it will serve to cover the ♠ T?
People play differently with robots than they do with people. Since this is a forum for reporting GIB bugs, I don't see in what way it is relevant to point out mistakes in the play of hand. OP is reporting errors in the bidding. What happened next isn't relevant to this thread, he could have stripped the play completely from the link. Maybe he was tilted, maybe he didn't care, or maybe he just plays bad, what difference does it make when it comes to the bidding sequence reported?
A lecture on how to always focus and play to the best of your ability is great when people come ask for advice on how to improve their play. But when they come to report a bidding bug, an off topic lecture isn't all that welcome.
Page 1 of 1