[pilowsky]

The free ACOL (sic) individual Daylong, with actual Acol-like bidding.
Are there any system notes?

[smerriman]

Um, wow?

This appears to be gigantic news?

https://doc.bridgeba...stem-notes.html

But why this of all things?

The date doesn't appear to be April 1..

[smerriman]

Oh my.. it's not GIB.. it's Argine..

[pilowsky]

atm I'm sitting on 51.85% with ~20 hours to go.
Considering I know about as much about Acol as I know about particle physics I'm pretty chuffed .

The provisional results window has a tab that leads to the 2/1 system notes, so that could be changed.

[thepossum]

Thx for the tip. I had a play

It felt weird after years of GiB 2/1 - not that different but different enough

Getting used to the different hours will be weird too - different part of the world is it?

[helene_t]

Nice start but they still have a way to go. There are many consequences of the weak NT which they haven't got right yet.

1♦-1♥
1NT*
should be 15-17 (or 15-16 in agricultural style), not 18-19

1♦-1♠
2♠*
should not be 11-14. It will have extra values (say a soft 15-16 bal or so) or shortness somewhere so appr. equivalent playing strength.

[thepossum]

There is something lacking so far. I seem to be able to find the right contracts (most of the time) from previous knowledge of how to bid rather than the descriptions

Missed one clear game because I couldn't find the bid. All a bit weird so far

Sadly in the absence of a nice handy "as you go" annotation tool I will have forgotten most of the problems this time tomorrow

[pilowsky]

Here's one major difference - it uses Gambling 3NT.

---

[helene_t]

1♠-2♥
2♠*
is nonforcing is (almost) all variants of Acol. Yes I know that The Hog likes to play it as forcing.

The robots play it as forcing.

[pescetom]

 helene_t, on 2022-October-27, 02:47, said:

1♠-2♥
2♠*
is nonforcing is (almost) all variants of Acol. Yes I know that The Hog likes to play it as forcing.

The robots play it as forcing.

3 weak twos?
1NT can include 5cM but 2NT not?
"Standard" support doubles?
3/5 leads?

Not sure Terence Reese would recognise this as Acol

[thepossum]

 pilowsky, on 2022-October-26, 18:13, said:

Here's one major difference - it uses Gambling 3NT.

---

Excitement plus. Looking forward to using it

[thepossum]

I've been referring to this

What I used to use as Acol

It has added excitement to the BBO experience, has it not

I am waiting for the Precision Bot

EDIT Just checked my second ACOL (sorry Acol) attempt - which shows how remarkable statistics on 8 hands can be

I should post one particularly sad hand - not for me - but for all these other people who made a perfectly reasonable bid

In fact here it is. Not an unreasonable bid anyway and not deserving of its fate. 4+ HCPs apparently

---

[helene_t]

 pescetom, on 2022-October-27, 14:06, said:

3 weak twos?
1NT can include 5cM but 2NT not?
"Standard" support doubles?
3/5 leads?

Not sure Terence Reese would recognise this as Acol

1NT with a 5cM and 3 weak twos is quite normal nowadays, but support doubles are not common at all and that a 2NT opening can't contain a 5cM is just weird.

[smerriman]

Argine's 4♥ feels like a homage to GIB's biddable suits

---

Also had the opponents open a weak 2♦, only to find a 3♦ overcall was natural.

I've forgotten how unusable non-RKC Blackwood is too. Whose idea was to teach that to beginners?

Still, it's fun to play with a new system. And how nice it is to see some actual signalling?

[helene_t]

 smerriman, on 2022-October-28, 19:47, said:

I've forgotten how unusable non-RKC Blackwood is too. Whose idea was to teach that to beginners?

There was a Dutch bridge teacher who said that he prefered teaching Blackwood exactly because it is useless. The students therefore won't overuse ace asking so badly.

I am not sure if he was serious.

But Berry Westra once wrote that RKC should not be on the menu for ordinary club players because it's too complicated.

[pescetom]

 thepossum, on 2022-October-27, 16:29, said:

I am waiting for the Precision Bot

Me too, but also the 2/1 Bot

Here's hoping that BBO now take the plunge to label the Robots rather than just "ROBOT". It was already stressful not to distinguish between basic and "advanced" Gib, but one really should know about Argine, both as partner and as opponent.

Are we allowed to know how Argine was ported? Will there remain a single Argine code base for Funbridge and BBO or are they now two separate projects?

[helene_t]

A weak 2-opening should not be 6-10 points in 4th seat.

[helene_t]

P-1♠
1NT*
should be limited to 8(9) points, I just saw the robot do this with a prime 11 count and 3-card support.

[pescetom]

 helene_t, on 2022-October-28, 02:44, said:

1NT with a 5cM and 3 weak twos is quite normal nowadays, but support doubles are not common at all and that a 2NT opening can't contain a 5cM is just weird.

My only Terence Reese book is a 1973 twilight affair which already reluctantly recognised weak twos and even the possibility of strong NT... FWIW it does explictly suggest 2NT with a 5M332 (no obvious alternative, given his distaste for 1 in a suit with such strong hands) but does not contemplate 1NT with a 5cM (to be honest, he does not explictly exclude it, but no examples have 5cM and it seems clear this is not even on his radar).

I wonder if the 2NT thing is some SEF relic (when I briefly played with Argine, I found it often reverted to SEF despite agreements).

[thepossum]

 pescetom, on 2022-October-30, 10:18, said:

Me too, but also the 2/1 Bot

Also the configure your card bot