[gwnn]

---

You have 3 spades. 3 is not 4. Furthermore, at least realize that 3♦ is your first suit and when I bid it it's not a cue bid for your second suit. This is really bad. Anyway, I think I will stop using GIB for at least the next few months (unless it's the weekly free instant), what is really the point? Nobody seems to care about these absolutely awful sequences. It is one thing to say "GIB has many problems and we cannot solve them all at once" and it is another to ignore all of these reports altogether.

Yep, my double was weak. Shame on me. That doesn't mean that GIB gets to bid diamonds and spades on 4 diamonds and 3 spades.

[1eyedjack]

West's 3C is not a thing of beauty either, either as a sensible bid or in comparison with the explanation attached.

What would X of 3C have meant, I wonder?

Generally I agree that the real howlers are risible. For me they don't happen frequently enough to stop playing.

[iandayre]

Your point is of course valid. GIB should never be bidding 3S, much less 4S.

But I have noticed lately that a large majority of the posts reflect very poor bidding by the human player, forcing GIB into decisions it never should have had to make.

I wonder if GIB would have balanced with a double if given the opportunity.

[gwnn]

I don't know what you mean by this. I don't think my double is 'very poor' when I know that the very worst case scenario is 11-11-11-7 and when I know that partner declaring can save precious seconds (this was a robot reward). But I digress. Next time I will have a proper double and gib will still bid like this. Who cares what I had? Sometimes I bid well and sometimes I bid bad. I don't think my mistake is of the same type as Gib's. Give me a little bit of extra pep like xx Axxx in the reds instead of Q Q and I think we'd both double. But on what conceivable 3244 hand should GIB first bid diamonds, then bid spades? The alert makes no sense already. It should be 4S6+D or something. And then GIB even takes 4D as a cue bid. What kind of a joke is that?

So:
-3D is questionable (double must be better) but OK I wouldn't start a thread on it.
-the alert of 3S is nonsense even when we don't know what partner's hand is (diamonds must be much longer than spades)
-partner's hand does not match the nonsense alert, he made it on an even more bizarre hand than the description
-the description of 4D is clearly wrong. It shouldn't be a cue agreeing spades. Nonsense. Sorry.

None of this was caused by my double. This is not a sequence like (the human being dealer)
1NT-2C
2D-3NT
4H
Which clearly is an idiotic stupid bid by the human and nobody can blame the robot for being confused. I am talking about a simple takeout double. What I did or did not do on this hand is completely irrelevant as far as it is a plausible bridge action (not self-contradictory). If your point is that I'm a worse player than GIB, I don't know, maybe I am. Shame on me. If your point is that my bidding on this hand was worse than my partner's, I'm going to have to disagree with you and also say that it's irrelevant. If your point is that only people who never over/underbid by a jack can report obvious, egregious, repetitive, never-corrected bugs in GIB, then I really have no idea what you're talking about.

[iandayre]

I thought my comments were pretty clear. I acknowledged your point that GIB's bidding was foolish. No, yours wasn't worse, but doubling vulnerable on that hand in direct seat would not have occurred to me.

[gwnn]

Ok but what does it have to do with this subforum? (it is still not called gwnn discussion) And everything that doesn't occur to you is suddenly very bad bridge? Shouldn't you be thankful for the people who don't pass throughout for finding more bugs than you do instead of reprimanding them?

And what does it take to get you to stick to the topic? I admitted that my double was weak already in the opening post. Do I need to submit a written apology as well?

[cloa513]

gwnn, on 2015-November-13, 14:13, said:

Ok but what does it have to do with this subforum? (it is still not called gwnn discussion) And everything that doesn't occur to you is suddenly very bad bridge? Shouldn't you be thankful for the people who don't pass throughout for finding more bugs than you do instead of reprimanding them?

And what does it take to get you to stick to the topic? I admitted that my double was weak already in the opening post. Do I need to submit a written apology as well?

The double draws GIB into an area with poorly defined logic which they are unlikely to fix as too uncommon. Your bid was pass or 2NT- really expecting a possible penalty result with doubleton heart holding.

[iandayre]

gwnn, on 2015-November-13, 14:13, said:

Ok but what does it have to do with this subforum? (it is still not called gwnn discussion) And everything that doesn't occur to you is suddenly very bad bridge? Shouldn't you be thankful for the people who don't pass throughout for finding more bugs than you do instead of reprimanding them?

And what does it take to get you to stick to the topic? I admitted that my double was weak already in the opening post. Do I need to submit a written apology as well?

Not at all. Post anything you like. My main point is, GIB doesn't do well responding to takeout doubles in general. Making them with marginal hands is losing strategy. In my opinion, this forum exists not only to point out GIB's weaknesses, but to identify successful - and losing - strategies for playing with and against them.

[gwnn]

cloa513, on 2015-November-13, 19:23, said:

The double draws GIB into an area with poorly defined logic which they are unlikely to fix as too uncommon. Your bid was pass or 2NT- really expecting a possible penalty result with doubleton heart holding.

Ok takeout doubles are uncommon. Got it. Thanks.

[gwnn]

iandayre, on 2015-November-13, 21:02, said:

Not at all. Post anything you like. My main point is, GIB doesn't do well responding to takeout doubles in general. Making them with marginal hands is losing strategy. In my opinion, this forum exists not only to point out GIB's weaknesses, but to identify successful - and losing - strategies for playing with and against them.

Ok in my opinion it is obnoxious to blame opening posters continuously, even after they had already admitted their misbid from the get go. If I need advice on my bidding, I will ask fot it. If I want to report a bug, I will report a bug. But we obviously differ in this and I obviously have no way of preventing this unsolicited torrent of criticism of my bidding decisions taken in split seconds to speed up the RR tournaments. I guess I'll just listen to the "Shame! Shame! Shame! *dingiding*" track every time I make a questionable decision, not just admit it in the opening post and see if that could get these theeads to stay on topic.

[1eyedjack]

3D is poor. 3S is very bad. 4S is a bug. End of.

[iandayre]

gwnn, on 2015-November-14, 01:08, said:

Ok in my opinion it is obnoxious to blame opening posters continuously, even after they had already admitted their misbid from the get go. If I need advice on my bidding, I will ask fot it. If I want to report a bug, I will report a bug. But we obviously differ in this and I obviously have no way of preventing this unsolicited torrent of criticism of my bidding decisions taken in split seconds to speed up the RR tournaments. I guess I'll just listen to the "Shame! Shame! Shame! *dingiding*" track every time I make a questionable decision, not just admit it in the opening post and see if that could get these theeads to stay on topic.

Continuous?? "Torrent" of criticism?? I made a short, one sentence comment, and subsequently made short, to the point responses to your extended comments. Perhaps you are a bit over sensitive?

[gwnn]

Yes, continuous and torrent, because this is not the first time you saw fit to comment on my bidding instead of gib's, despite the fact that I made it clear several times that I'm aware of the fact that my bidding is not perfect. This time you spent about two thirds of your post criticising users/in this case me with the groundbreaking news that my double was bad, as if that is complete news to me. What is the point of repeating what I already conceded in the opening post? Other than being obnoxious? What do I need to do to keep the threads on topic (I ask now for the third time)? I made it already very clear that a) I am not interested in your bridge lessons and b) I know that my double was questionable. I know I'm being oversensitive. That doesn't make your focus on my actions warranted. It also doesn't make gib's bidding better. I guess I will need to add another caveat to my posts here, (not just "I admit my bidding wasn't perfect" but also "I am psychologically unstable" or something like that) to see if that will keep these posts on point.

[1eyedjack]

A while ago Bbradley62 took to posting ONLY GIB's hand and actions, concealing his own, precisely to prevent spats like this. Personally I found it too much effort but it may be something to consider.

[gwnn]

Yes last time I posted oppGIB's double and got reprimanded for my "misbid" causing EW to misjudge. I then posted the hand only (wrong order I know) but people were essentially lolling at the idea of doubling.

[iandayre]

I guess it's sort of like the old caveat to never discuss politics or religion. If your main focus is peace and quiet, and not offending anyone, that is undoubtedly a sound approach. If you enjoy a spirited and intelligent exchange of ideas, as I do, then you sometimes have to ruffle someone's feathers.

[gwnn]

Actually, I was not the one who complained about your tone, it was the other way around. I found nothing wrong with your tone but I found the content severely lacking. You can paint me as oversensitive for labelling your irrelevant (66% irrelevant ok) post as irrelevant, but that doesn't make you necessarily right. I'm not offended, but annoyingly irrelevant things sometimes annoy me and I will let people know when they do it so (if they care), they can stop being obnoxious. Anyway I'm pretty sure I explained myself clearly enough already and I'm pretty sure you purposefully ignored it already so I will not repeat myself again.

[cherdano]

cloa513, on 2015-November-13, 19:23, said:

The double draws GIB into an area with poorly defined logic which they are unlikely to fix as too uncommon.

LOL