Author Topic: Trying to play with GIBs, a minor rant  (Read 7373 times)

onoway

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 44
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Trying to play with GIBs, a minor rant
« on: March 03, 2018, 07:50:34 AM »
This is in the endless hands since I find trying to do anything on the web version infuriatingly uncooperative, clumsy and cluttered:
P has  !C 875    !D AKQ9  !H Q9    !S J765
I hold  !C AQ42    !D J865  !H A2   !S A32

 Not vul opps pass throughout. P opens 1 !D. I respond 2 !C forcing
P then bids 2NT  to which I respond 3 !D to offer option of 3NT or  !D
P then bids 4 !C!  I gnash my teeth and think ugly thoughts about GIBs and bid 4 !D
At this point Gib bids 5 !C.

 I pretty much have to assume it has some decent  !C to rebid them or is this some sort of cue bid trying to get to slam? Why on earth would that be a possibility when neither of us are showing anything but minors and neither of us are showing any extras?  How in the world can it justify rebidding a lousy three card suit when it has the 4 card  !D suit with the three top honours and we have at least an 8 card fit?   In this case I suppose I should have ignored the  !D fit, just bid 3NT and hope that the K !S is finessable.






OliverC

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 262
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
    • OCP Super-Precision
Re: Trying to play with GIBs, a minor rant
« Reply #1 on: March 08, 2018, 10:36:53 AM »
!S J765
!H Q9
!D AKQ9
!C 875

!S A32
!H A2
!D J865
!C AQ42

I find this kind of situation a bit of a non-issue, I'm afraid, Pam. It's your 2 !C bid that is the main problem here, in my view.

Playing 2/1, I respond 2 !D over 1 !D without a nano-second's hesitation and responding 2 !C is grossly dangerous and misleading, in my view, especially when you rebid 3 !D over 2NT, because that is, in my view, definitely saying "I fancy something other than or more than 3NT". Would you not be playing inverted Minor Suit Raises if you're playing 2/1? Why 1 !D - 2 !C rather than 1 !D - 2 !D?

Now the sequence goes:
1 !D - 2 !D(inverted)
2 !S/2NT - 3NT

3NT may well fail here (and probably will) but, crucially, there is no better game contract available here. 5 !D needs a huge amount of luck and 4 !S needs the same luck in both Majors that you're hoping for in Hearts in 3NT. If 3NT fails, you just shrug your shoulders and move onto the next hand, safe in the knowledge that 80% of the room are probably in the same contract.

Bidding Systems are not about reaching the optimum contract on a given hand (probably 1NT or 2 !D on these cards), but about reaching the best contract you can realistically achieve, given your system. Nobody is going to be stopping short of a game on these cards and 3NT is the game contract with the best chance of making, compared to 4 !S or 5 !D.

If I was playing 2/1 and the bidding started 1 !D - 2 !C - 2NT - 3 !D, I would not be rebidding 3NT over 3 !D and would also be showing my tolerance for Clubs, safe in the "knowledge" that you had a massive Minor 2-suiter and a hand unsuited to playing in 3NT.
Oliver (OliverC)
IAC Website Obergruppenfuhrer

kenberg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1334
  • Karma: +13/-5
    • View Profile
Re: Trying to play with GIBs, a minor rant
« Reply #2 on: March 11, 2018, 03:47:02 PM »
An interesting hand. Much of what I say will repeat what Oliver said.

I might or might not bid 2C with your hand over the 1D opening, but if I did then after partner bids 2NT I would raise to 3NT.

If you want to offer partner the option of playing in diamonds, the time to do that is on the first round of bidding. After 1D-2D the possible strains are Ds and NT, at least that is barring some very strange development.

Let's look at what is known after pard opens 1D. Partner has at least as many diamonds as clubs.  You have the same number of diamonds as clubs. Therefore, the partnership has at least as many diamonds as clubs.  So, if 5+ D is to be considered as a contract, you might as well say so on the first round. To put it another way, after partner opens 1D it is very unlikely that you have a 9 card club fit but you might have a 9 card diamond fit. So forget about trying to play in clubs.

If the auction begins, as it did, 1D-2C-2NT I just raise to 3NT. As O says, bidding 3D over 2NT sends a different sort of message than you want. Partner will wonder: If she wanted to play in Ds, why did she not just bid 2D over 1D?

So:  While I do not feel as strongly as Oliver does about not bidding 2C, I would either raise Ds immediately or, after 1D-2C-2NT, I would raise 2NT to 3NT.

A word about the bots. I played three days in the recent online tourney with the bots. As near as I can recall, we had no bidding misunderstandings. Not that we always ended in the best contract, but I think I had no problems with the bots that I would not have had with humans. Imo, their bidding is (usually) reasonable enough. Their defense, otoh, is truly weird. This worked in my favor more often than it worked against me since the tourney rotates the hands so that the human has the most hcps. So usually the bots are on defense. More than a couple of hopeless hands came in thanks to the bot's weird defensive ideas. But I really cannot recall any complaint I had with their bidding throughout the 72 boards.

One more thought. I mentioned elsewhere that I am thinking of renting the dollar bot for the day, starting a teaching table, sitting all four bots at the table, and have them play the 72 boards from the tourney just to see how my choices would compare with the bot who replaced me. You could try that with these hands and see what the bots do. I would bet it goes 1D-2C-2NT-3NT. But I might be wrong, of course.

PS.  It is good to see someone other than me putting up a hand!


ADDED:   I just loaded the hands you gave, randomly assigning the other cards to the opponents.
The auction was 1D-2D-2NT-3NT

Result: Making with one overtrick! Fortunately, the bot on opening lead held the K of H and lead a heart, riding to the Q.  I did place the EW cards randomly but I suspect many other random placements would lead to going down.


I am definitely NOT claiming that the bots are the final word but it's interesting to see what they do. Here they take a direct route to 3NT.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2018, 06:22:43 PM by kenberg »
Ken

onoway

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 44
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Trying to play with GIBs, a minor rant
« Reply #3 on: June 25, 2018, 03:17:40 AM »
Ok I suppose I am used to more of a conversation with partner than the bots offer, blame my Goren background which insists on a somewhat less arbitrary behaviour unsuited to duplicate I suppose. You'd think after all this time on BBO I'd have got over that but early conditioning dies reluctantly. The bots drive me crazy a lot of the time, in particular when their bid announces such things as it is showing the king of Diamonds, which happens to be in MY hand.

kenberg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1334
  • Karma: +13/-5
    • View Profile
Re: Trying to play with GIBs, a minor rant
« Reply #4 on: June 25, 2018, 02:47:33 PM »
Pam, try this as an exercise. Imagine that you are playing with your clone. So you both think the same. How would the auction go, and why?

Playing with Goren, I am less than certain he would open your partner's hand. Goren played pretty strong openings. If it began 1D-2C he definitely would not rebid 2NT at least as I remember it. 1D-2C-2NT showed  something extra.
Goren opened 4 card majors but not Jxxx. Moreover, with two four card suits and 3-2 in the others he opened the four card suit that lay below the doubleton so he would open 1D (if he opened at all) even if the spades were better and the diamonds weaker.

But it has been a long tine since I played Goren. So really I think the profitable question is: How would you and your clone bid the hand?

In particular, why not 1 !D - 2 !D?

Discussion of inverted minors is much needed. At least for diamonds, here is how I see it: 1 !D - 2 !D is forcing for one round. The 2 !D bidder might have less than game forcing values. If so he will have 5+ diamonds and plans to bid 3 !D on the next round. The 3 !D can be and often will be passed.  If the 2 !D bidder has only 4 diamonds then he has game forcing values, as is the case here. So, after 1 !D - 2 !D the final contract will be game or slam, and will be in diamonds or NT. Here it will be in NT, and this might or might not make. With more shapely hands, you might end in 5 !D. But, after 1 !D - 2 !D there is no possibility that you will end in clubs. And with these hands, a 12 count opposite 15, you will end in game not slam. Ending in game not slam, and ending in diamonds or NT, seems like what we want.

When the minor is clubs rather than diamonds there is more to be said for insisting that 1 !C - 2 !C promise five cards since with only four clubs and invitational values you surely have a hand that can either bid a suit at the one level or else a hand where you can bid 2NT.

Here is what the GIB noes say about 1 !D and afterward:

"Usually 4 unless 4432. Opens 1♦ with 4-4 in the minors. 2♦ response is forcing, inverted. 2♣ response is forcing for one round, but not game force."

This of course is not enough guidance. Some comments on it:

I am pretty sure the Gibs now play 1 !D - 2 !C as game forcing. I'm not positive, but pretty sure.
But "2♦ response is forcing, inverted" further clarification.
As I recall, the Gibs play 1 !D - 2 !D - 2NT as passable. BWS plays it as a one round force.
As noted, I gave the hand to the Gibs, and indeed it began 1 !D - 2 !D so they do raise on 4.

Goren of course did not do inverted minors so that option was out. I assume that you do use inverted minors. So, why not? Partner opens 1 !D, you look at your hand. Ending in game or slam, and ending in diamonds or NT, seems like what we want.






« Last Edit: June 25, 2018, 02:57:50 PM by kenberg »
Ken

onoway

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 44
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Trying to play with GIBs, a minor rant
« Reply #5 on: June 26, 2018, 02:29:26 PM »
Short answer is because if p opens a simple raise doesn't show the strength of my  hand.  P is minimum and will pass that and I don't want that to happen. It's been a Very long time since I played any sort of Goren and not entirely sure what I learned, literally at my parents knees at the weekly bridge game, even was strictly Goren, but certainly closer than any other system I've run into.

Certainly p's opening is within the parameters of point count, if a tad aggressive given the weaknesses in the hand but iirc Goren wasn't a shy bidder., In any case with such an opening I'd expect p to pass anything reasonable asap. Therefore I have to show I have extras somehow, and encourage ongoing dialogue. So then I'd expect my clone to say something like, oh really! Tell me more about your hand, maybe we ve got game somewhere!b and..we are still at a low level so we can get out if needed.  So them we explore for a fit , likely ending up in some number of dia., because  of the fragile other suits.  a huge difference in the games is that in rubber bridge it's generally a very bad idea to go down. Sacrifices are not generally a winning strategy  as they often are in duplicate. BuI just as in duplicate, getting into the bidding as soon as possible is.

As I said it's been a VERY long time and quite possible one or either of my parents had developed a twist or two that worked for them, until I came to BBO I'd never had a "lesson" in my life.

 That's just the way it was, not any sort pride or shame. I didn't even know there was such a thing as duplicate.  Joining BBO was definitely a shock! Thank goodness for BIL in those days with people like Susan Doty shepherding innocents into the shadowy world of conventions! Sorry Oliver you were (and still are) way beyond my ability to follow into the mysteries of Precision! I tried to leap from knowing NO conventions to understanding your notes on Lebensohl and got somewhat traumatized, like trying to teach a grad 5er physics, it didn't take, even with the best of intentions!
« Last Edit: June 26, 2018, 02:40:39 PM by onoway »

onoway

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 44
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Trying to play with GIBs, a minor rant
« Reply #6 on: June 26, 2018, 02:48:50 PM »
By  The  way,  not trying to defend Goren, he doesn't need it and even if he did I've no impressive record to wave as a banner. Just trying to explain what a totally different world I grew up in in bridge terms and why I go off on tangents sometimes.

kenberg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1334
  • Karma: +13/-5
    • View Profile
Re: Trying to play with GIBs, a minor rant
« Reply #7 on: June 26, 2018, 05:59:45 PM »
If I understand it correctly, you do not play 1 !D - 2 !D as forcing.  So the all-bot auction that I gave earlier, 1 !D - 2 !D -2NT - 3NT was unavailable to you.

I started bridge in 1961 by reading Goren. I liked it fine. But Goren has been dead, literally and figuratively, for quite a few years.

Let's try SAYC
http://web2.acbl.org/documentlibrary/play/SP3%20(bk)%20single%20pages.pdf

In SAYC, 1 !D - 2NT is natural with 13-15 highs.  Same as Goren if I recall correctly. So that would be an option in SAYC. But the 2NT is passable with the bots, so let's say you start 2 !C. Partner bids 2NT.   OK, 3NT. Why not? Is it really likely that after 1 !D - 2 !C - 2NT that the hand belongs in 5 !D?
It's possible perhaps. But think of 3 !D from partner's point of view, whether bot or human. He has bid 2NT and you, after starting with 2 !C, now bid 3 !D. Partner sees this as you announcing "From my hand I think we are unlikely to belong in NT. Continue on to 3NT at your own risk". So he says "Ok, I guess we need to find a minor to play in. I have three clubs, partner surely has five to bid this way, so 4 !C". Oops.

So: The bot auction playing inverted minors is 1 !D - 2 !D - 2NT - 3NT. In SAYC it could be either 1 !D - 2NT - 3NT or 1 !D - 2 !C - 2NT -3NT.

Here is a made up hand to illustrate the above:
!C AKJ74    !D J865  !H 2   !S A32

Partner opens 1 !D, you bid 2 !C, partner rebids 2NT. This hand could well belong in 6 !C or 6 !D, and if not then probably 5m. So you bid 3 !D. This is more along the lines of what partner would expect when you first bid 2 !C and then 3 !D.  After 3 !D partner can still bid 3NT. But with Qx in hearts he surely won't. 3NT would have no play opposite this hypothetical hand of yours,   5 !D has decent chances. Far from certain, but his opening was a bit marginal.


At any rate, however it starts exactly, if partner at some point bids 2NT, raising to 3NT sounds right.
Ken

aloysuis

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Trying to play with GIBs, a minor rant
« Reply #8 on: June 29, 2018, 06:55:48 AM »
I found this post very interesting, thanks.  Having only this year taken up 2/1, I find the robots [and explanations] pretty solid in bidding, but is there any point in signalling in defence?
Also, if GIB can declare the hand better, why can't the robot? - possibly they aren't linked, but robot declarer seems to select the worst line of play even more often than I do!

kenberg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1334
  • Karma: +13/-5
    • View Profile
Re: Trying to play with GIBs, a minor rant
« Reply #9 on: June 29, 2018, 01:04:48 PM »
Figuring out just why the bots do what they do is a challenge.  I keep meaning to do a serious analysis but so far I haven't.

I believe that they actually signal in some instances. Of course "signally in some instances" is hard to tell from "random plays that occasionally are correct signals"

The appear to ignore any signals from their partner, so there maybe is no reason for them to signal.

When BBO folks  describe what the bots do during play, they usually refer to random simulations. I hope they will someday explain this a little. There have been several times I cannot imagine any simulation that would make anyone choose the line the bot chooses.

I have thought some about the limitations of simulations. I suppose simulations go something like this: Consider the unseen cards randomly distributed and then see  which play has the best chance. Ok, but this does not, or might not, take into account what others are likely to do. Double dummy analysis, which I assume is what a simulation uses, can be interesting but in fact it is not all that great a predictor of what will actually happen. People rarely drop stiff kings when there are three cards out, the double dummy analysis does.

I defended a hand yesterday where the line I took was nuts. Perhaps random double dummy analysis would show it plausible, but taking the human element into my thinking would have led me to the correct line. I try to do this, the bots don't. 

But there are other cases where I really cannot see how any analysis, with or without considering the human element, would lead then there.

I have posted some hands with the bots. My general view is that they are often ok and sometimes very good. But other times they appear to have suffered from some electronic  zap. But then that applies to me also.
« Last Edit: June 29, 2018, 01:07:18 PM by kenberg »
Ken

kenberg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1334
  • Karma: +13/-5
    • View Profile
Re: Trying to play with GIBs, a minor rant
« Reply #10 on: June 29, 2018, 01:43:05 PM »
Here is a hand to illustrate some points made in my reply to aloysuis. I played it yesterday in the "just declare". The bots do the bidding, you are then to cope with the results as declarer.

http://tinyurl.com/yamgbmld

Look at T1. Who on earth would lead the stiff !H K? Nobody. But the dd analysis says it is harmless. Sure. Playing dd I will drop the stiff K. In actual play, I wouldn't.  So a simulation works poorly here since really it is saying "Leadiing the stiff K might well be ok since if declarer holds the A he can drop it anyway".

So now I am on track for 9 tricks. I made 10. I got some help at T6 when the bot, after winning the !D K, led a !C allowing me to get a sluff/ruff. Should he have known better? Well, E was dealt !C JT54 and he did play them in the order 54J. Otoh, W was dealt !C 8632 and played them 386. So signals here might have been random. So maybe from the bot's viewpoint I could have been dealt AKQT.

Now how about the human element? Surely if I had the !D A I would have played it [Edit: Well, maybe not] before playing my clubs. And just as surely I don't have the !S A since if I did, I would not be throwing the !S K from the board. So if the bot trusts me at all, then some things that a random simulation would consider viable in fact are not at all reasonable.  I am pretty sure the bots never take the human element into account.

Playing with the bots, or for that matter with humans, requires a sense of humor. Still, it is interesting to try to crawl inside their brains.

« Last Edit: June 29, 2018, 08:41:29 PM by kenberg »
Ken