[uva72uva72]

My link

Matchpoints, ACBL robot individual

On multiple occasions (as recently as May 10, "What's the upper limit here?") participants have documented the fact that the system notes for the sequence 1♠-1NT;2♥-2♠ wrongly credit North with 8-10 HCP and 2-3♠. Playing 2/1, that sequence properly shows 2♠ and less than 10 HCP or, less often, 3♠ with less than 7 total points. The prescription in the notes allows North no way to bid hands with no long suit of their own, less than 3♠s and less than 8HCP or with 3 ♠ and less than 7 total points. However, I had never encountered the problem hands when this sequence came up, and I and everyone else credited North with the stronger hand in deciding how to proceed.

The problem hand has now come up, and despite holding the weaker hand, North bid it as if it had the strength called for in the notes. To my knowledge, the discrepancy does not exist when South rebids other than 2♥ after opening 1♠. Now perhaps BBO will see the need to fix the problem.

[cloa513]

uva72uva72, on 2015-May-26, 16:57, said:

My link

Matchpoints, ACBL robot individual

On multiple occasions (as recently as May 10, "What's the upper limit here?") participants have documented the fact that the system notes for the sequence 1♠-1NT;2♥-2♠ wrongly credit North with 8-10 HCP and 2-3♠. Playing 2/1, that sequence properly shows 2♠ and less than 10 HCP or, less often, 3♠ with less than 7 total points. The prescription in the notes allows North no way to bid hands with no long suit of their own, less than 3♠s and less than 8HCP or with 3 ♠ and less than 7 total points. However, I had never encountered the problem hands when this sequence came up, and I and everyone else credited North with the stronger hand in deciding how to proceed.

The problem hand has now come up, and despite holding the weaker hand, North bid it as if it had the strength called for in the notes. To my knowledge, the discrepancy does not exist when South rebids other than 2♥ after opening 1♠. Now perhaps BBO will see the need to fix the problem.

I assume the hand is just to demonstrate the poor state of GIB bidding and bidding explanations but you have to admit that even with North holding 8-10 HCP then South is nowhere near strong enough to bid game. North's hand is just a simple pass.

[uva72uva72]

With VERY slight modification, this is the hand that North held the last time I encountered this sequence:

♠10xx♥Kxx♦Kxxx♣Axx.

Opposite the hand you have described as a clear-cut pass over North's 2♠, it looks like 5 makes if the ♠K is onside.

But yes, the whole point is the unreliability of North's bidding and the explanations.

[kuhchung]

It's a bad explanation, but honestly I just do normal things and find that it works out more often than not. Bashing 4S is really nuts.

I know, this doesn't take away from GIB's crazy explanations.