[fuzzyquack]

Some time ago I submitted a post under the same title in a different forum expecting a BBO response. BBO in my opinion allows extremely generous claims. Why not to shoot a claim then? Here's an example of an admitted double squeeze claim. Well, it turned out to be a single squeeze, but this aspect is immaterial. May someone from BBO respond?
Since I don't know how to insert a played hand, here's url:
https://tinyurl.com/yjpyhk82

[nige1]

Fuzzyquack 'Some time ago I submitted a post under the same title in a different forum expecting a BBO response. BBO in my opinion allows extremely generous claims. Why not to shoot a claim then? Here's an example of an admitted double squeeze claim. Well, it turned out to be a single squeeze, but this aspect is immaterial. May someone from BBO respond?'
++++++++++++++++++++
IMO FuzzyQuack is right that BBO robots seem over-generous in allowing claims but he would be more likely to get a response if he keeps posting to BBO discussions e.g.
Gib robot discussion or
Suggestions for the software

BBO should reject claims unless based on the claimer's hand being "high" in top tricks.

---

[manudude03]

The point is there is a line that lets you make the rest regardless of the position of the other cards for as long as there hasn't been a revoke and so it accepts the claim. This isn't like the 2-way finesse position. Personally I find something quite satisfying about finding those.

[pescetom]

manudude03, on 2021-July-18, 11:32, said:

The point is there is a line that lets you make the rest regardless of the position of the other cards for as long as there hasn't been a revoke and so it accepts the claim.

The point is that you might not be really sure about that line, or even just happy to hope there is a line.