[SimonFa]

---

North was my iBridgeBaron set to play 2/1 at "master" level.

What's the point of the transfer then a bid of 6NT? Am I supposed to bid 7♠with a maximum and if I have a max surely I would have super accepted?

As always,thanks in advance,

Simon

Edit: Scoring was IMPS, nominally teams in that the computer calculates the score for the other table and even shows the bidding and play.

This post has been edited by SimonFa: 2015-October-23, 06:45

[kenrexford]

Well, I suppose two things, strangely. First, maybe you super-accept. Second, maybe North finds out about a lack of heart controls (or possible lack of heart controls) by inducing a lead-directional double of 2♥, with the assumption perhaps that a heart lead would be made anyway if he just blasted 6NT.

[1eyedjack]

What Ken said, although I think it more likely a glitch in the software that results in leaked info for no purpose.

Does the software accept a method of scoring, and if so was it set to MP?

Either way, I don't think that you are invited to the party, over 6N

[kenrexford]

Interesting end position, in a potentially strange way. A likely start might be club Ace and club back. If so, after a flurry of red cards and club pitches, the end position is three spades on each side and a decision to hook or drop.

At IMP scoring, percentages.

At MP scoring, this gets trickier. The right decision wins, obviously. But, suppose you play one high honor and then lead small toward the other high honor and hook option, all following at all times. Suppose, then, that you guess wrong. The wrong guess of a hook means that you are set two tricks. The wrong guess of the drop means that you are set one trick.

Now, back up. For those who do not get the club Ace and back a club attack, either wrong guess means a one-trick set.

So, it seems that a pessimist should hedge his bets by guessing wrongly to play for the drop.

That happens to be the normal play, perhaps, but it is a different way to look at the situation. If the spades had been only a combined 8 cards, and some little worthless club on the side, then maybe this changes. Playing for the drop guarantees -1 when God hates you. Playing for the hook is 50-50 for -2. So, the pessimist might go anti-percentage on his "when it is wrong" move as a MP hedge to solve his problem of also getting the damnable club lead.

[aguahombre]

We all, from time to time, have knee jerked a conventional bid when we didn't have any need for it. Computers are human, too.

[Cyberyeti]

I suspect this is angling to investigate 7♠ opposite a super accept. KQxx, Axx, Kxx, Axx for example is a good 7♠.

[gszes]

all computer programs are doing the "best" they can within the limits of the human being(s) that programmed them. I would quit worrying about obvious high level umm errr bit bucket bidding and be happy with the general overall info that can be gained from such programs:))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

[aguahombre]

gszes, on 2015-October-23, 10:02, said:

all computer programs are doing the "best" they can within the limits of the human being(s) that programmed them. I would quit worrying about obvious high level umm errr bit bucket bidding and be happy with the general overall info that can be gained from such programs:))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Yes, and it seems the OP would be even happier and gain even more if he knew what the critter's bids mean.

[SimonFa]

Thanks everyone. I was wondering if I'd missed an obscure convention but it doesn't look like it.

I suspect that what is happening is that depending on the skill level a certain amount of randomisation seems to have been added to the bidding and play and it has resulted in this bid.

I say that because sometimes with identical bidding it finds widely different opening leads and lines of play even when the CPU is playing both tables. I've also seen it having different bidding when my had has passed throughout at both tables.