BBO Discussion Forums: FANTUNES REVEALED by Bill Jacobs - BBO Discussion Forums

Don't worry too much about their system after 1NT it can be replaced by your favorite system after 1NT

 han, on 2012-August-16, 09:18, said:

Some of this doesn't make sense, you only get a very short version of their methods over 1N in the book as it's semi assumed you'll play your own (as Gerben says).

They like garbage stayman, but it appears 1N-2♣-2♦-2♥ is not garbage but a puppet to spades so possibly they're bid through there or they're in the 1N-2♦-2♥-2♠ complex.

 ulven, on 2012-August-08, 06:59, said:

Is it possible that Nunes more frequently sits in the client chair? Of course it is also quite possible that Nunes is just better than Fantoni, or many other possible conclusions.

 Hanoi5, on 2012-August-16, 05:47, said:

Some flavors of KERI do that too. I play that with a couple of partners.

 Gerben42, on 2012-August-16, 11:31, said:

Their whole system could be replaced with my favorite system...

However, they are a successful pair with somewhat odd methods (including over 1nt), and I'd be interested to know what they play?

 Mbodell, on 2012-August-18, 17:29, said:

Nice possible explanation.

Norberto Bocchi, about Fantoni-Nunes: A very solid partnership, and good teammates (merit), but their problem is their system (flaw).

Bill - thanks for revealing the Fantunes to the world!

One thing that book's statistics is missing is the (e.g. average) IMP exchange when Fantunes pass in the first or second seat. Does anyone happen to have statistics on that? An IMP pairs event would probably be the best measure for this - since having Lauria-Versace in the other room significantly biases pass-rate gains/losses.

 niks, on 2012-September-04, 19:46, said:

I don't have data for when Fantoni-Nunes passed in 1st/2nd seat, but I do have some data for my own partnership. The differential on 1st/2nd seat passes is when Fantunes passes with a weak-2 opening. We lost imps on average, but there weren't a lot of data points.

Fantunes also loses a small number of imps due to passes in 3rd seat. You can't make light 3rd seat openings at the 1-level (i.e. about 8-11 points), although you can at the 2-level.

I would warn against trying to infer too much low-level detail from the statistics. The board count is not high enough. I had to smile when I read the posts about results when Fantoni opened compared to when Nunes opened. Thinking through it logically, the outcome is surely meaningless, and simply proves that you can always find some weird conclusions to make from a limited data set if you look hard enough.

Statisticians have a name for this fallacy: it's called the "Look Elsewhere Effect".

Cheers ... Bill

Can someone help with this one. I did install bidedit as recommended. However, when I load the .bss file it offers selection of hands of a particular pattern, rather than the whole hand and the bidding sequence. Am I doing something wrong, or is there another way to properly display the .bss file contents?

Thanks in advance!

Maybe ulven can find the standard deviation of the IMPs gained an lost by each of the two players so that we can calculate a p-value?

At the European champships in brighton (when? http://www.chrisryal...ohn.manning.htm), the mean square swing was 38.14 IMP^2, while a study on OKbridge data gave a variance of 31.7. Something must be wrong since it looks very weird that the variance is higher at a serious event than at OKbridge, maybe I am missing something.

Obviously the standard deviation for a particular player (say Nunes) across many boards will be a little lower than the standard deviation across the field, and it is also a bit dubious to use the field SD (in which some tables were opened by N, some by E etc) as a surrogate for the SD across boards where (say) Nunes opened, but anyway, let's set the SD to 5.5 and just keep in mind that the test will be a bit conservative.

OK, the standard error of each of the two players' mean IMP is something like 5.5/sqrt(630) = 0.22. The t-test gives us a p-value (two-sided) of 0.0004. Could it really be a statistical fluke? When I see extremely low p-values associated with very implausible effects my first thought is "data management artefact"..... but I like Mbodell's hypothesis. Can't really think of anything else that could explain it.

Congrats to Bill Jacobs, "Fantunes Revealed" just won IBPA Book of the Year.

It is not clear to me why someone would want to buy a book about a system designed by a winning pair but written by a person who does not know the system. Did Fantunes decide to completely describe their system to Bill Jacobs but to no one else? I don't think so, I will wait for the Fantunes edition.

Before you make disparaging comments about Bill Jacobs, I suggest that you find out what you are talking about. Bill has analysed '000s of Fantunes hands. He plays the system himself and has spoken to them about it. Rarely have I read a more ignorant and foolish post on this forum.

 the hog, on 2013-September-28, 18:56, said:

Here is a comment by Fulvio Fantoni:


Risposta di Fulvio Fantoni

Dear Giovanni,
I'd like to precise that the book you quote hasn't been written by Claudio or me, but by a third person. This person watched our play and tried to deduce our system and was able to reconstruct many bidding sequences exactly, but not all of them. In the case in point, the bidding sequence you report is not correct. For us 2NT in that bidding sequence means 14+, 5+ e 4+ hand. Anyway, you should know that this is going to change very soon, because we want to introduce transfers at 2 level, too.
Best regards
Fulvio

Not 100% sure the book was from my notes, but Bill told me the system he played was based on my notes, so I'm pretty sure the book was a polished version of the notes. Why reinvent the wheel? Anything that helps get the word out (a la WJ and all the other free notes I have out there).

Thanks,
Dan

 DJNeill, on 2013-September-28, 19:55, said:

Now we find that Jacobs' book is based on someone else's notes on Fantunes' system...Where can I buy it???

 dboxley, on 2013-September-28, 20:16, said:

As Jacobs himself says:

"I should emphasize up front that the methods described in this book are a little different to what Fantoni and Nunes actually play - it is an adaptation of Fantunes with a slightly reduced level of complexity. In many ways Fantunes is a style rather than a system."

So don't buy it. I am sure Bill's heart will break.

 dboxley, on 2013-September-28, 18:29, said:

While you are waiting, keep a lookout for the official Meckwell system book.