[thorvald]

---

How can GIB accept the invite on this minimum hand with 4333 and 3 jacks?

It is of course difficult for GIB to know, that the red jacks has no value as partner won't have a 4-card suit in red, but even then an accept is strange.

[smerriman]

Once again I can't replicate this with advanced bots.. passes at all four vulnerabilities.

Are you sure you're not playing with the free bots?

[thorvald]

smerriman, on 2022-October-21, 14:25, said:

Once again I can't replicate this with advanced bots.. passes at all four vulnerabilities.

Are you sure you're not playing with the free bots?

Probably a free bot as it is a challenge

But I do not expect this to be a simulation

[smerriman]

OK - you should really specify if you're using a free bot. Like discussed in similar threads in the past, there is 0 upside to changing the book bid here, and the advanced robot gets it right, so there's nothing to fix.

[thorvald]

smerriman, on 2022-October-21, 17:00, said:

OK - you should really specify if you're using a free bot. Like discussed in similar threads in the past, there is 0 upside to changing the book bid here, and the advanced robot gets it right, so there's nothing to fix.

How can the book bid be 6♣? Looks like an error in the bidding database.

[smerriman]

thorvald, on 2022-October-22, 06:48, said:

How can the book bid be 6♣? Looks like an error in the bidding database.

Sure, something is probably off by a point somewhere. There are lots of places in the database where it may come up with the wrong bid (a more common case is where there are two possible options - like pass or give preference to an earlier suit, and the wrong one has slightly higher priority.)

But GIB was never designed to work with half its algorithm disabled. That half is deliberately intended to fix small issues on the fly. In the latter case I mentioned above, I expect it's even intentional that no effort was put into prioritizing those two continuations, as a lot of decisions can't be based on simple facts like points alone and you know that GIB will get to choose between both options on a case by case basis.

Database issues like this only need fixing if there is an *earlier* bid in the sequence where simulations have been turned on - because it uses the database for the followup. For example, if GIB in South's position is told to simulate over the 2NT bid to decide whether 4NT is a good choice, then it would be important to ensure the database accepted correctly.

But that's not a simulation spot, which is why there is zero reason to change the database here. Other than to placate people using a free service, but I think if BBO ever got back to improving GIB, paid customers would be the only ones worth considering.

I've been assuming most of your forum posts have been with the proper robot, but if not, that does nullify quite a lot of them. (Obviously many are still insane as the above situation doesn't apply.)