BBO Discussion Forums: 6-12 - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

6-12

#21 User is offline   lycier 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,612
  • Joined: 2009-September-28
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:China

Posted 2016-May-02, 22:09

View Postgwnn, on 2016-May-02, 00:06, said:

Lycier, I asked you three questions in my previous post and you answered none of them. Well, you answered my last one implicitly with "no, I can never 100% admit GIB is wrong". All I got were vague comments about rigidity and maturity. No thanks. Of course I know that sometimes when I make an invitational bid to the 3 level and my partner rejects, we could go down and I will wish I had bid only 2. That doesn't make the range 6-12 correct. Maybe it could be 6-10. I'd be OK with that. But can't you see that 6-12 is too wide? (this is a question, feel free to answer it)


Gwnn, I strongly think this issue is not "Yes" or " No" because " Yes" or " No" can't solve the problem.
I find you actually care about the opinions of others, we can only say yes to you, can't say no, otherwise you will become angry, even slander our rudeness or bad manners, is this the correct attitude towards the discussion?

As a Gib fans, we all love and care about Gibs, my passion never be less than any bbo fans in this forum, especially never be less than you Gwnn.
0

#22 User is offline   lycier 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,612
  • Joined: 2009-September-28
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:China

Posted 2016-May-02, 22:22

View PostStephen Tu, on 2016-May-02, 20:54, said:

3H is a reasonable call having made responsive double over 2c, now you show both the 5th heart and the 4 cd spades. But it's not really the best call over 2c IMO.

Holding 4-4 in the majors, one can make a responsive double over 2c, and over 3c passed back to you, you can double again if at the top end of your range, or you can pass with a minimum if partner chose not to bid.

And here, although opener is right to bid 3c, the range of 12-18 is again too wide IMO. Probably should be ~12-16.


Now I would better show it .



Now, how about it ?
My conclusion : We have no way to do as we like in the many many situations in the current.

However, whenever reading your comments, only for me, it is a pleasure to enjoy.
0

#23 User is offline   Stephen Tu 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,097
  • Joined: 2003-May-14

Posted 2016-May-02, 22:49

View Postlycier, on 2016-May-02, 22:09, said:

Gwnn, I strongly think this issue is not "Yes" or " No" because " Yes" or " No" can't solve the problem.
I find you actually care about the opinions of others, we can only say yes to you, can't say no, otherwise you will become angry, even slander our rudeness or bad manners, is this the correct attitude towards the discussion?


He's frustrated because he posted a rather simple bug, a simple question, and you kind of dodge the issue bringing in lots of other auctions that are just showing additional bugs and aren't really at all relevant.

This is the question.

1.With Axx AKJxx xxx xx, is this an appropriate hand for GIB to bid only 2h over 2c in response to the initial takeout double? Is it too strong, or not too strong? Would you personally bid only 2H in this position?

If you say that it's perfectly fine to bid only 2H, then we just totally disagree with you. You will miss far too many games.

If you agree with us on that hand, think it's too strong to bid only 2H, then the question becomes what if you make the hand slightly weaker, Axx AQJxx xxx xx, is that only 2h? Then Axx AQxxx xxx xx, etc., and keep on asking the question until you find the borderline strength. There can be slight disagreement on exactly where the line should be. Maybe 2h is OK with 10 total points. Maybe 2h is not enough with 10 total points. But with 12 total points, 2h is just way too conservative, I guarantee you no good player is going to bid 2H only 12. Or 11 for that matter, IMO. On 10, there's maybe some room for debate, but there's no question that GIB's range needs to be reduced by a couple points at least. And maybe a little higher on the low end, 6 is rather aggressive, can pass and see if partner can double again.

If we fix GIB on just the range of 2H, make it narrower, that will help GIB reach a lot more good games then letting it bid 2H with such a wide range. The ranges of 2h and 3h are currently overlapping, one is 6-12 the other is 10-12. This is a bad situation, allowing GIB to bid 2H on such strong hands. The priority for 3h should be higher than 2h, and they shouldn't overlap. Either it should be 2h=7-10, 3h=11-12, or 2h = 7-9, 3h=10-12, either is probably reasonable, we can debate what the line should be. Stronger hands should cue, or perhaps bid 4h with 6+H. Hands with both majors should responsive x.

If you disagree with this, and think it's totally ok to bid 2h on Axx AKJxx xxx xx, explain why. Don't post irrelevant other auctions. Tell us the strongest hand you'd bid only 2H on, and the weakest hand that is worth 3H to you.
0

#24 User is offline   Stephen Tu 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,097
  • Joined: 2003-May-14

Posted 2016-May-02, 23:00

View Postlycier, on 2016-May-02, 22:22, said:

Now I would better show it .



Now, how about it ?

This just shows that one needs more range adjustments. The actual North hand probably isn't strong enough to double again, not having much extra over the initial responsive double, and probably should give up. The second double should perhaps show 10+, not 12+ as it's defined now. South, having a minimum takeout double should bid only 3 of a major not 4, showing maybe 12-13 or so, rather than being GF'd by the second responsive double. Most 14+ probably take a call over 3c IMO having heard the first double, there shouldn't be any hands jumping to game here, let advancer raise to game if he actually is good 12+.

Tweaking the ranges would allow NS to compete more often on this type of auction and get it right to compete 3 over 3 without getting overboard at 4 level quite as much.

Quote

My conclusion : We have no way to do as we like in the many many situations in the current.

Right, GIB needs fixes. Lots of fixes on takeout double auctions. Even when opening side passes there are lot of issues. When opening side bids, lots more sequences, lots to fix.
0

#25 User is offline   lycier 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,612
  • Joined: 2009-September-28
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:China

Posted 2016-May-03, 01:36

Stephen Tu, you are great.
I would say thank you very very much for your help.Posted Image
0

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users