[lycier]

 Bbradley62, on 2015-October-17, 09:49, said:

It was a basic bot, which should have the same bidding rules as advanced robot. This should be a bidding rules issue, not a simulate-the-best-response situation.

Recently,I played a basic hand,ridiculous bidding,but just to put this hand in comparison with what Diana played same hand by advanced robot.

This hand played by basic robot :

---

The result :3♠W-2

Same hand played by advanced robot :

---

The result : 3NN-2


How many issues would you find?

I can find :
1- There is a wrong of evaluation,whatever it is basic or advanced.
"Total points" =HCP+3 for void, 2 for singleton, 1 for doubleton, but short suits containing an honor are reduced by 1 point
Singleton K=?
Its TPs=3hcp-1+2=4,its real value is less than 2 point,in other word,singleton K,don't devalue but increase in value,this is a distorted description,overvalue !

2- Same bidding approach,but advanced robots are more aggressive.

3- Same bidding rules.And what Bbradley62 said is correct.

4- The unfair is south is me instead of basic robot.

Any ideas?

[1eyedjack]

Quite a few issues. I have not gone through the card play but as the contracts are different the card play will provide no insight into the differences between basic and advanced.

And the only difference in the bidding is North's 3N, which seems to be a gross overbid, no doubt a result of "advanced" bot "exercising judgement" (or mis-exercising it I should say) where basic bot just follows rules (to better effect on this occasion).

But prior to the 3N bid both bots take the same action, some of which is surprising, or at least the explanations are.

East has 17 HCP. As 6 of the HCP are tied up in QJ doubleton and K singleton, I personally would not be inclined to upgrade it to 18+ total points. But even were I to do so, what would 3D have meant? West could have no strength and only 4 Spades. 3D must show extras compared with an opportunity to bid 2D instead of Double.

Then 3S shows "5 - 16 total points". Eh? Is the bid forcing? Certainly with 16 total points and rebiddable spades opposite an 18+ total point hand there is no way I would want to risk 3S being passed. But then, if I have just 5 total points opposite 18 total points, neither would I want to compel us beyond 3S.

Then I might gamble on a double with the East hand over 3N, in the knowledge that partner is not a bust.

[iandayre]

I'll comment on a couple of points here.

I will admit that the final 3NT call by the advanced robot is simply infuriating.(I should be used to it by now). NO sane human would make this call and the fact that the robot does so is very disturbing. An double of 3S with the maximum 1NT response would be quite sensible, and pass would be at least within reason. It appears I owe the basic robots something of an apology!

Jack's next-to-last paragraph brings up a point I have been seeing more often. One partner's point range has been established, then the other makes a call that ostensibly shows a range which, at the higher end, would certainly belong in game, while at the lower end clearly does not. Another simple example - I doubled opener's 1D in direct seat with 1444 shape and 20 HCP including AT9x of D. After partner's expected 1S I bid 1NT, and partner took out to 2C. The description was 1-9 points. How can one possibly be expected to know what to do opposite that range? Fortunately RHO saved me by doubling 2C and after P by me and 2H by LHO, my GIB partner came to life with 3NT, making easily.

Then there was the recent time I doubled 3 of a major, and partner took out to 4D. The description? 20 or less points. LOL. Gee GIB, you don't think you might make a stronger bid with 19? The hilarious result? With 2 small of opener's suit, 44 in the others, AKx of D and 16 HCP, I passed for down 2. Those who went to 5D were treated to a generous defense and were down only 1!!

But then we already know that the bid descriptions are, in many instances, totally inadequate, and that BBO has no intention to expend the necessary resources for the complete overhaul that is needed. A shame. It's true that most of them are OK for simple constructive auctions, but once there is competition we are often flying blind.

[Bbradley62]

It seems likely that the root of Advanced North's bad 3N is that South's two passes do not properly limit his hand. The first pass should deny 6 clubs (didn't rebid clubs) and should limit South to 14 HCP (didn't redouble). If North had believed this, he wouldn't think 3N was a reasonable bid.

[lycier]

 Bbradley62, on 2015-October-20, 23:14, said:

It seems likely that the root of Advanced North's bad 3N is that South's two passes do not properly limit his hand. The first pass should deny 6 clubs (didn't rebid clubs) and should limit South to 14 HCP (didn't redouble). If North had believed this, he wouldn't think 3N was a reasonable bid.

Sorry,I disagree.
1- Your comments may be a lot of pure guess.
2- Of importance,how many defferences are there between cuebid 3♣ and rebid-3♦ directly after 2♠? Usually cuebid 3♣ implied 3-card ♠ support with game forcing in the most cases,do you agree with my opinion?

[lycier]

What is more important,how dare advanced north robot ignored 3♣ with 18+TPs,then bid up to 3N game? What's the reasons? Think it over .

[cloa513]

 lycier, on 2015-October-21, 12:14, said:

What is more important,how dare advanced north robot ignored 3♣ with 18+TPs,then bid up to 3N game? What's the reasons? Think it over .

I'D say it assumes partner has 4 or 3 clubs in hand so 3♣ is a bad choice.

Though the fact the East's only choice to describe his hand is double and then cue with little support- couldn't it just be set to use its standard defence against 1NT not that that's good but it better than a crappy hand descriptor.

[lycier]

 cloa513, on 2015-October-22, 17:59, said:

I'D say it assumes partner has 4 or 3 clubs in hand so 3♣ is a bad choice.

Though the fact the East's only choice to describe his hand is double and then cue with little support- couldn't it just be set to use its standard defence against 1NT not that that's good but it better than a crappy hand descriptor.

I think almost of human only overcall 2♦ unless play other precise gadgets if human plays this hand.

[1eyedjack]

Double by East followed up by 3D over 2S (as bid by West) is I think at least a credible alternative to a direct 2D overcall by East (instead of Double), if that is what we are arguing over. Nebulous 3C is just unnecessary. Not that I see this as having much bearing on the madness of North's 3N