[kenberg]

From the write-up about the Gib cc:
"When leading from 3 small, it leads top of nothing against NT, low against a suit contract."

Yesterday, against a 4NT contract, Gib led the diamond 2 from 632. But the uncontested auction was
1C 1H
2NT 4NT
Pass

The K is the only missing diamond honor. So maybe I should assume Gib is smart enough to not under-lead a K after this auction? Still, why not the 6?

Anyway, I can take 12 tricks (some did) if I work out the position and it's matchpoints so I need to do it. "Why the 2?" is not a complaint, it's a question.

Earlier in the notes on the cc, it says:
"GIB doesn't interpret your signals or make many inferences from the play, it uses simulations based on the auction."
Is that probably what happened here, or has Gib been re-programmed to lead low from three small at no trump as well as at suits?

I play a lot of pick-up on bbo and I have been thinking that "Gib standard" could be a sensible approach when little has been discussed. So I have been looking a bit at the details as they arise.


http://tinyurl.com/y7qa6o9l
<br style="box-sizing: border-box; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Verdana; font-size: 13.3333px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial;">

[steve2005]

http://www.bridgebas...es-wrong-again/

somebody posted the same thing recently

[kenberg]

Thanks. I figured maybe it was simply an adjustment for the strong auction, but it seems as if it is what Gib does.


I am guessing that Gib's programming gets updated and the changes do not always make it into the write-up.

[johnu]

kenberg, on 2017-December-17, 20:33, said:

I am guessing that Gib's programming gets updated and the changes do not always make it into the write-up.

The most likely situation is that whoever wrote up the GIB notes got it wrong and nothing was ever corrected.

[virgosrock]

johnu, on 2017-December-18, 01:51, said:

The most likely situation is that whoever wrote up the GIB notes got it wrong and nothing was ever corrected.

last 6 months for sure GIBBO has not led middle from 3 small. Not fixing this description in the URL is serious lack of customer (are we non-paying customers ?) service. If same applies to GIBugs gawdhelpus.

vrock

[jdonn]

I will see what I can do. My preference is to make it just follow the lead conventions, but second choice is to clarify or eliminate that part from the convention card.

[smerriman]

jdonn, on 2017-December-18, 23:17, said:

I will see what I can do. My preference is to make it just follow the lead conventions, but second choice is to clarify or eliminate that part from the convention card.

It would be very interesting to see what some of the reasons were for the other exceptions I listed in the thread I linked to, like when it led low from a 64 doubleton once.

[virgosrock]

smerriman, on 2017-December-18, 23:55, said:

It would be very interesting to see what some of the reasons were for the other exceptions I listed in the thread I linked to, like when it led low from a 64 doubleton once.

8 years or so ago GIB used to lead low-hi from doubletons especially in the middle of play rarely on opening leads.
These days for sure it does lead low from T/J/Q x. not always but noticeably enough. Throws partner's defense off.

vrock