[rhm]

Today the following hand occurred:

I was South, GIBs were in other seats:

---

The explanation of bids is provided by GIB.
I do not understand why the GIB software can not honor forcing bids, which it defines as such by itself.
What is so difficult about implementing the concept of forcing bids in the software?
Can the developers not align their explanation of bids with the software?
I understand that the software may sample the best outcome, but why can the developers not ensure if a bid is declared as forcing and the next opponent passes that Pass is not a possibility of GIBs next bid, even if sampling suggests it could be best.
How will GIB ever be capable of a sensible exchange of information in the bidding if it does not honor forcing bids?

Rainer Herrmann

[nullve]

 rhm, on 2016-September-06, 04:17, said:

How will GIB ever be capable of a sensible exchange of information in the bidding if it does not honor forcing bids.

Maybe GiB read my thread and got confused. Sorry!

[nullve]

Perhaps even more disturbing:

---

But I'm actually grateful that GiB apparently defaults to Pass (and not e.g. 7N) whenever it's in simulation mode but unable to generate a single deal consistent with the bidding so far.

[jdonn]

One problem is the text is not connected to the programming or the logic in any way. So unfortunately it must always be taken with a small grain of salt. It's not as though GIB knows the text says forcing, therefore it should not pass.

That being said, I can't imagine why GIB would pass here even if it thought it could, with five card support and not being broke. I will report this hand.

[iandayre]

 jdonn, on 2016-September-06, 09:44, said:

One problem is the text is not connected to the programming or the logic in any way. So unfortunately it must always be taken with a small grain of salt. It's not as though GIB knows the text says forcing, therefore it should not pass.

That being said, I can't imagine why GIB would pass here even if it thought it could, with five card support and not being broke. I will report this hand.

Thank you for your recent presence here JDonn, it is appreciated. I have seen GIB pass like this before, after interference. It never does so in an uncontested auction. My guess would be some sort of "hole" in the programming such that GIB has not been given clear/proper instructions on how to proceed after interference to the 2C opener. I would think it similar to the times when GIB passes high level cue bids. I have assumed that no specific instructions have been given to GIB on how to proceed, so it passes by default.

[lycier]

Good topic, good discussion.

 jdonn, on 2016-September-06, 09:44, said:

One problem is the text is not connected to the programming or the logic in any way. So unfortunately it must always be taken with a small grain of salt. It's not as though GIB knows the text says forcing, therefore it should not pass.

That being said, I can't imagine why GIB would pass here even if it thought it could, with five card support and not being broke. I will report this hand.

I disagree with your points.

Despite thinking there is a serious problem in this hand,I am surprising how you are gonna tell the Gib programmers, say to them that such sort of mistakes should be a priority item to be fixed ? you are one of top players in US, I 100% believe you should know its exact reason. What's its exact reason? I think worse 2♣ system is just most important reason, improving its system is moving in the right direction. I'm afraid that other suggestions to them would waste time, meaningless.
What else?
Don't be surprised because Gib's 2♣ opening system is very poor and pretty primitive in fact.
Here I would better take a simple example : 2♣ - 2♦, see the definitions on 2♦.
2♦ says "2♦ bid waiting -- 11-hcp,12-TPs,forcing to 2N."
Everybody, how many players with advanced plus skill are using such a bad gadget?
Very few, would you agree?
" 11-hcp,12-TPs " is too wide range, it's absolutely impossible for Gibs to want to describe its hand accurately. So this would be a biggest problem.
When a car encounters a fault, sometimes you may have no way to repair unless you are gonna replace defective or worn parts. In fact this hand only showed a small part of reasons.I am wondering whether you didn't find its real issues or deliberately hide its truth.

[manudude03]

I would actually argue that the 2D range isn't wide enough. 2C-2NT is notoriously bad for bidding in general, so I would say 2D should be all hands which can't make a suit positive.

[iandayre]

 manudude03, on 2016-September-07, 16:44, said:

I would actually argue that the 2D range isn't wide enough. 2C-2NT is notoriously bad for bidding in general, so I would say 2D should be all hands which can't make a suit positive.

I would agree with manudude. I haven't seen better players using a natural 2NT response to 2C for decades. My last few years of live play I was using 2D as waiting but GF, 2H as artificial negative and 2NT to show a H positive. I liked this a lot, but it doesn't seem to have gained a lot of traction. I don't expect GIB to adopt this, but if currently active live tourney players such as Stephen Tu or JDonn would comment, I would appreciate it. Anyone with an opinion of that method is welcome to chime in if they wish.

[lycier]

Iandayre, even it doesn't seem to have gained a lot of traction, actually it is far more better than current system for sure.
I would take a example.
See the " OP " in the sequence, I am gonna show how acurate your method is.

---

Current system : Pass is no specific meanings, I think it is a shame to be so wasteful. What else?
Your method : Pass is a positive responding with game power. Double is a negative responding and denied game power in the hand.

Your replies are very good.

[Stephen Tu]

I think it's *good* for 2♦ to be limited. I think when responder has decent close to slam values he should show them. Concealing them, then trying to catch up later after opener has bid some game not knowing about responder's extras, sometimes leads to awkward auctions where responder bids blackwood or something and assumes captaincy without really being able to count tricks, without knowing where the holes in the hand are. It's better IMO for the weak hand to show some stuff then show whether he has fit for opener or not then let opener take control. Giving all the room for opener to describe doesn't really work because still not enough room to show all of the strong hand's many features. Weaker hand has fewer features to describe.

Now, I normally swap the 2♥ and 2nt responses in my normal partnerships, but if this were not an option, I'd actually prefer 2d=0-7, 2nt=8+ (and 2+ controls) vs. 2d=0+ and 2nt unused. But one probably does need some followups after 2nt to find 4-4 major fits, like 3♣ by opener be either clubs or balanced looking for 4-4 major fit.

I think among better live tourney players it seems mostly 3-way split between 2d 98% automatic, 2d=GF/2h=double neg, with control responses bringing up the rear (I am definitely not a fan of control responses, and don't particularly like 2h=double neg either). But I don't think live tourney players have necessarily found the best methods here. 2c openers are pretty rare, most 2c auctions start 2c-2d-2nt where followups are well explored, most auctions end in game not slam, a reasonable percentage of slams are somewhat obvious to bid, and sometimes you can just guess right, so one can easily play kind of lousy methods and mostly get away with it without having a major impact on your scores.

The bigger problems for GIB are when interference causes the auction to go off to undefined tracks, and the auctions starting with 2c-2d-3m where the followups are totally messed up.

As for what GIB should play here regarding 2♦, there's a potential conflict between popularity and what is most effective. Since many/most players do bid 2d with nearly everything, then GIB maybe has to follow them.

[antonylee]

Another "not honoring the force":

http://tinyurl.com/j6xg6yr

Gib redbl's, explaining as "opponents cannot play undoubled below 2N", then passes in passout seat opp's 2D (with AK97 of trumps, on top of that).