search

EdwardPiwowar / BBA

1 stars 0 forks source link

Is this a regression error? #638

Open ThorvaldAagaard opened 5 months ago

ThorvaldAagaard commented 5 months ago

0103A607127C1859B8BA64FB10B2 image

Or have you implemented some rules, where Jacoby 2N should not be used with 4+ support and an opening hand?

But also a good example of a situation, where North should NOT ask for aces as the response 5H will force to slam missing an ace and trump queen.

With minimum North should just bid 5D

EdwardPiwowar commented 5 months ago

At mine. Where does 4C come from? image Jacoby is not bid if is possible 21GF bid with good 15+ HCP.

ThorvaldAagaard commented 5 months ago

That is wrong. There is no upper Limit for Jacoby 2N

My version bids 4C

This is the CC I use GIB-Thorvald.bbsa.txt

EdwardPiwowar commented 5 months ago

Next BBA image

ThorvaldAagaard commented 5 months ago

I think North should bid as you show. This is how it is looking now image

ThePokerDude commented 2 months ago

Still wrong in 8642. With the given information in upper screenshot (1 king) 7s is not a good bet. It's not easy but there seems to be the agreements how the bidding continues after opener shows shortness. Responder shows cuebids. BBA still has the problem that given multiple choices it does not choose the most specific one. If we compare 3d to 3s - very similar but 3d shows additionally a cuebid. In https://github.com/EdwardPiwowar/BBA/issues/548 I have described a possible idea how these kinds of problems. In this specific case (when we agree to show cuebids) 3s would even deny a diamond or heart cuebid. But this would I don't know how to implement.

image image

EdwardPiwowar commented 2 months ago

Next BBA image image We have 9 HCP in hearts and only 2 tricks. Since it cannot be shown, it is difficult to expect a good contract.

ThePokerDude commented 2 months ago

8643 - Somehow the change is not implemented. image

EdwardPiwowar commented 1 month ago

7S is a regression - there will be 6S.