[bluenikki]

 mikeh, on 2022-September-19, 16:34, said:

And if you are stuck over 3H, then I’d just blast 6N. There’s a reason virtually all expert partnerships have very detailed agreements and use lots of low-frequency artificialities. When the right hands arise, those agreements make ‘judgement’ less challenging.

Why I didn't blast 6NT:

1. The club AK may be missing. In that case, there may well be no play for 12 tricks, even if they don't cash the first two tricks.

2. The club ace may be missing. In that case, notrump is wrong-sided.

[akwoo]

My preference is that opener's 2♥ bid shows 4=3=1=5 (and they bid 2♠ with 4=2=2=5 and xx in diamonds).

I suppose 3♥ is a strong suggestion to play in a Moysian, but it feels like it shouldn't really exist.

I want to say that, in this situation, there has been no suit agreement, and hence, even if not playing Kickback, 4N by responder is natural quantitative. But most people seem more averse to sometimes completely giving up RKCB than I am.

[michel444]

 bluenikki, on 2022-September-19, 05:37, said:

---

In a robot imp individual, I responded 1♥ and, as I feared, I was never able to express my extremely high slam interest.

On reflection, I believe I would have been better off responding 2♥ even though this would have promised "rebiddable hearts." As Charles Goren wrote in a different context, "It is better to lie about a deuce than about a king."

Any other ideas?

In the homegrown methods I played with my late wife, the 2NT response to any suit one-bid showed 16+ without a six-card suit or two five-cards. It worked wonderfully.

robot are funny whatever is bid over 1 heart is speculation and no matter what is the bid you go to blackwood the probality of finding that AK of club are misiing
exist but with "standard " 5 cards major" i see no other option

[cherdano]

 mikeh, on 2022-September-19, 17:01, said:

Hey, I was very careful to carve out an exception for…well…exceptional players�� which Roger Lee is.

So your point was?

A pathetic attempt at a lame joke!
I think that's progress - rather than a flamewar breaking out, one of us attempts a lame joke, which briefly irks the other one.

If I had been trying to make a point, it would have been that I respectfully disagree. But I couldn't have said anything better than what Roger and the late Justin already wrote on bridgewinners in this thread: https://bridgewinner...ine-nabc-event/

E.g., Roger:

Quote

It is not possible to be good at bridge but bad against the robots. It is not possible to be good against the robots but be bad at bridge. They are pretty equivalent skills.

Quote

I would be the first to admit that there are elements of robot bridge that are distinctly different from normal bridge, but to me it is wrong to think that robot bridge is 'not bridge' due to these differences. It seems to me that most people who make these claims do not really play much against the robots.

It's not the Spingold, but being good at deduction, deception, logical inferences, general cardplay technique, and having good overall bidding judgment are not just 'part' of the robot game, it is basically the entirety of the game. I hope people who belabor the small differences between robot bridge and normal duplicate bridge could find it in themselves to agree with that.

[johnu]

 Gilithin, on 2022-September-19, 08:04, said:

But you do know that Opener has 5 clubs, since the 1♠ rebid announces an unbalanced hand

Not true in the GIB 2/1 system, at least according to the descriptions. As for human players, it depends on partnership agreements.

[Gilithin]

 johnu, on 2022-September-20, 14:34, said:

Not true in the GIB 2/1 system, at least according to the descriptions. As for human players, it depends on partnership agreements.

I addressed the matter of up-the-line bidding system in the section immediately following this that you conveniently chose to cut.

[mikeh]

 cherdano, on 2022-September-20, 07:27, said:

A pathetic attempt at a lame joke!
I think that's progress - rather than a flamewar breaking out, one of us attempts a lame joke, which briefly irks the other one.

If I had been trying to make a point, it would have been that I respectfully disagree. But I couldn't have said anything better than what Roger and the late Justin already wrote on bridgewinners in this thread: https://bridgewinner...ine-nabc-event/

E.g., Roger:

Thanks for this. I looked at some of the comments on that thread (only a score or so out of 800+) and learned (or re-learned) that there are at least two variants of GIB. I suspect that my views are based on having encountered GIB only when playing solitaire and that the GIB that does that is the less ‘skilled’. Thus I didn’t recognize ‘deception’ or ‘good overall judgement’ as attributes of GIB.

I’m sure we all have GIB stories. I have too many to recite. However on one hand my RHO opened a minor, I overcalled in spades and eventually RHO reversed into hearts….and its partner, with a stiff heart and 4 card support for the minor, passed. Their vulnerable 4-1 fit played about as well as you’d expect


Also, forget balancing…GIB raises you as if you have an opening hand, etc.

If the advanced version minimizes these bugs, then maybe I’m being too harsh.

[johnu]

 Gilithin, on 2022-September-20, 15:00, said:

I addressed the matter of up-the-line bidding system in the section immediately following this that you conveniently chose to cut.

OP stated that he was playing a robot individual, and the GIB system does not require an unbalanced hand to rebid 1♠. So all the analysis assuming that 1♠ promises an unbalanced hand does not apply in the GIB system.

[Gilithin]

 johnu, on 2022-September-20, 17:30, said:

OP stated that he was playing a robot individual, and the GIB system does not require an unbalanced hand to rebid 1♠. So all the analysis assuming that 1♠ promises an unbalanced hand does not apply in the GIB system.

If the thread is meant to talk GIBish then it should be moved to the appropriate forum. As long as it is in Natural Systems, it is appropriate to discuss bidding system options in general.

[nullve]

 Gilithin, on 2022-September-20, 18:01, said:

If the thread is meant to talk GIBish then it should be moved to the appropriate forum. As long as it is in Natural Systems, it is appropriate to discuss bidding system options in general.

Are you sure?

Quote

Natural Bidding Discussion
This is the place to discuss popular systems like SAYC, 2-over-1 game force, and similar systems. General advice, system notes, how to continue an auction on a specific hand and related discussions.

Quote

GIB Robot Discussion
Report GIB bugs (new thread for a new bug please)
Suggest systems that GIB should play
Discuss GIB strategies
Report..ahem, good plays by GIB

[bluenikki]

 Gilithin, on 2022-September-20, 18:01, said:

If the thread is meant to talk GIBish then it should be moved to the appropriate forum. As long as it is in Natural Systems, it is appropriate to discuss bidding system options in general.

As I tried to make clear, I am not complaining about what GIB should or should not do.

I am interested in what to do with a human partner when there has been the absolute minimum discussion of system subtleties.

That is *not* a trivial subject.