[lycier]

This is my traveller's link :
http://www.bridgebas...username=lycier
I have no idea how to make comments on a list of issues.

- Hand-1 Normal sequences in the seven hands.

---

- Hand-2 When with interference at two level :

---

---

---

- Hand-3 Advancer have kept silent :

---

- Hand-4 Gib opens 1♣ with 4-4 minors.

---

- Hand-5 Best bidding sequence

---

How do you think of these issues?

[Stephen Tu]

Even though these different sequences come from the same actual deal of 4 hands, it is really best if each different auction is considered a completely separate problem. Because you want to think of GIB's bidding decisions as arising looking at only one player's hand, and the particular sequence of bids it has seen before it has to choose. Don't think of the hand as a whole, that is really irrelevant. We want GIB's choices to be reasonable looking at only one hand, and not be based on knowing what all 4 hands are. Like your last "best sequence" example, it looks totally contrived. You want GIB to overcall NT showing a good 15 despite holding a 14 count. And conceal 3 cd spade support after a transfer and new suit despite holding KQx of trumps and a doubleton. That's absurd, that's east basically cheating based on knowing all 4 hands beforehand and catering his bidding to get to the game that makes double dummy. This is not the proper way to analyze bid choices. Remember think of player looking at only his own hand and previous bidding. Not all 4 hands! The bids need to work on percentage across the universe of all possible layouts given the bidding, not just work best on one specific layout. Percentage bids can fail on any particular deal, you can't expect to double dummy bid everything. Just like you take percentage plays in the play, and going to be sometimes wrong (like finesse for K holding 10 cds in trump suit, but lost to stiff K offside and could have dropped it), you have to make percentage bids, and accept they won't always work out. You can't look at all 4 hands and contrive bids that will work well, because next time the layout can be wildly different even though facing the same bid sequence, you don't know how the auction will progress afterwards!

So I would post each different sequence as a separate deal, and can discuss which bids you think are suboptimal, which ranges should be adjusted on GIB's bid meanings. Certainly there are issues here like why no consistency in which minor it opens, why not always balance as west, and too conservative 2s raises when East passes initially.