My link
Matchpoints, ACBL robot individual
After several months of observation, it's my opinion that the robot believes that my double of 2♥ is for take-out. In every instance during that period, North removed the double to a new suit - and I started keeping track because I thought that what was what was consistently happening.
I believe in the vast majority of partnerships, this double is lead directional. There are, I think, some instances where some partnerships interpret a double of a suit they've bid as asking partner NOT to lead the suit. I'm not aware of anyone who plays this double as take-out.
It's my personal preference that this double be lead-directional (particularly since North almost never leads my suit otherwise). At the very least, however, if North is interpreting the double at take-out, I think the system notes should reflect that fact.
Page 1 of 1
Truth in Labeling
#2
Posted 2015-June-06, 19:49
No comment on your general observation, but I am not convinced that this is a good example to illustrate it. The position is considerably more complicated than treating the double as take-out.
East's 2H commits E/W to at least 2S
South's X relieves West of any obligation to bid, as East now has another chance to call.
From North's perspective there is a zero chance of defending 2HX. North also has 2 bites at the cherry with a choice of immediate and delayed action. Delayed action carries the risk that the auction may be higher than 2S at his next chance.
Suppose North were to decide, rightly or wrongly, that he is not prepared to defend 2S. How, for example, should an immediate 3D be distinguished from (assuming available) a delayed 3D? Might one choice indicate Heart tolerance, perhaps? I think that would be a bit sophisticated for GIB.
Perhaps with xx of Hearts opposite the X of 2H, North has no business introducing a 5 card waist-coat headed by the J, but you have to admire his success in finding a 9 card fit on this occasion where the earlier X risked languishing in a 7 card Heart fit. Without doubt North got lucky, as South could just as easily have had 4 Clubs rather than 4 Diamonds.
East's 2H commits E/W to at least 2S
South's X relieves West of any obligation to bid, as East now has another chance to call.
From North's perspective there is a zero chance of defending 2HX. North also has 2 bites at the cherry with a choice of immediate and delayed action. Delayed action carries the risk that the auction may be higher than 2S at his next chance.
Suppose North were to decide, rightly or wrongly, that he is not prepared to defend 2S. How, for example, should an immediate 3D be distinguished from (assuming available) a delayed 3D? Might one choice indicate Heart tolerance, perhaps? I think that would be a bit sophisticated for GIB.
Perhaps with xx of Hearts opposite the X of 2H, North has no business introducing a 5 card waist-coat headed by the J, but you have to admire his success in finding a 9 card fit on this occasion where the earlier X risked languishing in a 7 card Heart fit. Without doubt North got lucky, as South could just as easily have had 4 Clubs rather than 4 Diamonds.
Psych (pron. saik): A gross and deliberate misstatement of honour strength and/or suit length. Expressly permitted under Law 73E but forbidden contrary to that law by Acol club tourneys.
Psyche (pron. sahy-kee): The human soul, spirit or mind (derived, personification thereof, beloved of Eros, Greek myth).
Masterminding (pron. m
s
t
r-m
nd
ing) tr. v. - Any bid made by bridge player with which partner disagrees.
"Gentlemen, when the barrage lifts." 9th battalion, King's own Yorkshire light infantry,
2000 years earlier: "morituri te salutant"
"I will be with you, whatever". Blair to Bush, precursor to invasion of Iraq
Psyche (pron. sahy-kee): The human soul, spirit or mind (derived, personification thereof, beloved of Eros, Greek myth).
Masterminding (pron. m





"Gentlemen, when the barrage lifts." 9th battalion, King's own Yorkshire light infantry,
2000 years earlier: "morituri te salutant"
"I will be with you, whatever". Blair to Bush, precursor to invasion of Iraq
Page 1 of 1