[FrankerZ]

http://tinyurl.com/q667klx

Just had this hand occur in one of the free automated tournaments. I would have thought it would recognise that it should bid over this double and let us make a fairly straightforward 4S?

[1eyedjack]

Your card play is a lot better than mine.

Not that I think that passing the double is correct.

[Bbradley62]

1eyedjack, on 2015-February-26, 13:25, said:

Your card play is a lot better than mine.

8 of 11 who declared in spades took 10 tricks.

[1eyedjack]

Bbradley62, on 2015-February-26, 13:46, said:

8 of 11 who declared in spades took 10 tricks.

So that just confirms that my card play is inferior, as stated.

Did you see how the hands were played? Several played West for the Spade Q. One of them did not have to guess as West led a Spade from Qx (not even at trick 1).

So it makes double dummy. "Straight forward" seems resulting. Thankfully I was not there as I would probably have been one of the few, unless I had friendly defenders.

[lycier]

No.
Please look at the explanations of his double without explanations.
It is just the explanations can't pop up to bring about the happening of passing accident.
Some are due to network problems,some are due to no explanations on it.

[Bbradley62]

lycier, on 2015-February-26, 18:33, said:

No.
Please look at the explanations of his double without explanations.
It is just the explanations can't pop up to bring about the happening of passing accident.
Some are due to network problems,some are due to no explanations on it.

This was not a robot tournament; it was an Automated Express tournament. Bid explanations are not loaded in those tournaments.

[lycier]

Bbradley62, on 2015-February-26, 18:40, said:

This was not a robot tournament; it was an Automated Express tournament. Bid explanations are not loaded in those tournaments.

I see,dear friend.
If no explanations on his double,Gib usually don't know its partner have taken action,it looks like same with its partner passing.

[Bbradley62]

lycier, on 2015-February-26, 18:55, said:

I see,dear friend.
If no explanations on his double,Gib usually don't know its partner have taken action,it looks like same with its partner passing.

No. GIB knows what the calls all mean... there just isn't a Full Disclosure Convention Card loaded in those tournaments to display the meaning. Certainly, if you are playing in that tournament and GIB opens 1N and you (his partner) respond 2♥, GIB knows this is a transfer, not a natural heart bid, even though no meaning is displayed.

[lycier]

Bbradley62, on 2015-February-26, 19:01, said:

No. GIB knows what the calls all mean... there just isn't a Full Disclosure Convention Card loaded in those tournaments to display the meaning. Certainly, if you are playing in that tournament and GIB opens 1N and you (his partner) respond 2♥, GIB knows this is a transfer, not a natural heart bid, even though no meaning is displayed.

No.
I have posted many similar topics without explanations on the bidding,final conclusion is it is its explanations can't pop up to bring about the happening of the accident according to my research.
I should say I often see this kind of phenomenon in the past --- it is time for the accident happen while the explanations can't pop up,always!

[Bbradley62]

So, in your fantasy world, is it only doubles that GIB doesn't understand in the Automated Express tournaments, or all bids?

[lycier]

Bbradley62, on 2015-February-26, 19:31, said:

So, in your fantasy world, is it only doubles that GIB doesn't understand in the Automated Express tournaments, or all bids?

What I said are truths in my eye,and Gib really don't understand or know its partner's double if no explanations on that double.

[Bbradley62]

We all know that GIB leaves in too many doubles, regardless of whether or not the explanation is displayed. Do you think this South didn't understand that North's double was for takeout?

---

[lycier]

Ok,let's listen to gorgi's comments on it.

[helene_t]

Bbradley62, on 2015-February-26, 20:11, said:

We all know that GIB leaves in too many doubles

Yes. I wonder how it works. The EV of passing the double should be reasonable straightforward (assuming that GIB has well-chosen constraints on the other three hands, and assuming that the DD analysis is a good surogate for DD), but what is the EV of bidding on? Clearly it is too crude to assume that the alternative is for advancer just to place the contract, but it is also too optimistic to assume that bidding on will always lead to the best contract.

Here, N may have been fooled by E's failure to raise with 3-card support.