Help
The hand after, the auction went like this.
GiB will at least occasionally trot out LoTT when responding, but when advancing it seems to be lost in the wind.
Even then, the double pass is mysterious.
Maybe the slightly disconcerting explanation of a vulnerable 2♥ overcall as "5+ ♥;10+ HCP; 1" (sic) has something to do with it?
Page 1 of 1
Law of what?
#1
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 7,315
- Joined: 2014-February-18
- Gender:Male
- Location:Italy
Posted 2023-January-08, 16:09
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,761
- Joined: 2014-March-15
- Gender:Male
Posted 2023-January-08, 19:12
There's a certain place in BBO where exporting a hand can result in the description being cut off after a certain number of characters (or after a certain character); not quite sure where, but that's just an issue with the exporter, not the actual GIB definition.
There is an issue here in that it thinks 3♥ over 3♣ is 10-13 total points, which is nonsense. Just some generic rule about what to do after the opponents bid a new suit at the 3 level that shouldn't be applicable here. If North has passed 2♠, it would have been a more appropriate definition with a minimum of 3 points. So it doesn't even consider 3♥ over 3♣, since it's too far removed from the actual hand.
But as to the actual pass, not so sure there is anything wrong here. The old version of GIB does consider 3♥ as a direct raise to 2♥, and bids it about a quarter of the time. The other 3/4 it think it's a poor choice, sometimes getting raised to 4 where game has no hope, sometimes just performing worse than 2♠. Don't think pass is too mysterious to me.
And as to the second pass, if I adjust things so it does consider 3♥, or get North to pass to see whether it will compete to 3♥ over 2♠ instead, it has passing as a pretty clear favorite in a simulation. The Law was made for humans, and simulations should outperform it, so I'm not sure pass is wrong here.
There is an issue here in that it thinks 3♥ over 3♣ is 10-13 total points, which is nonsense. Just some generic rule about what to do after the opponents bid a new suit at the 3 level that shouldn't be applicable here. If North has passed 2♠, it would have been a more appropriate definition with a minimum of 3 points. So it doesn't even consider 3♥ over 3♣, since it's too far removed from the actual hand.
But as to the actual pass, not so sure there is anything wrong here. The old version of GIB does consider 3♥ as a direct raise to 2♥, and bids it about a quarter of the time. The other 3/4 it think it's a poor choice, sometimes getting raised to 4 where game has no hope, sometimes just performing worse than 2♠. Don't think pass is too mysterious to me.
And as to the second pass, if I adjust things so it does consider 3♥, or get North to pass to see whether it will compete to 3♥ over 2♠ instead, it has passing as a pretty clear favorite in a simulation. The Law was made for humans, and simulations should outperform it, so I'm not sure pass is wrong here.
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 7,315
- Joined: 2014-February-18
- Gender:Male
- Location:Italy
Posted 2023-January-09, 04:56
Thanks.
What worried me about the definition was not the mysterious "1" but the minima of 10 HCP and 5 cards, which I hope are mutually exclusive.
The "Law" was made for humans, but it's also useful in stopping opponents bidding 2S, be they human or not.
I will take your word for it that a second pass is a simulation winner: FWIW it was a resounding bottom on this distribution in this field. It would be interesting to know what kind of values were attributed to West, who can admittedly have less than this, but not as little as that definition might suggest.
What worried me about the definition was not the mysterious "1" but the minima of 10 HCP and 5 cards, which I hope are mutually exclusive.
The "Law" was made for humans, but it's also useful in stopping opponents bidding 2S, be they human or not.
I will take your word for it that a second pass is a simulation winner: FWIW it was a resounding bottom on this distribution in this field. It would be interesting to know what kind of values were attributed to West, who can admittedly have less than this, but not as little as that definition might suggest.
Page 1 of 1