Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Theoretical Bidding System 2.0
#21
(09-09-2013, 01:27 PM)ToreadorElder Wrote:  No, it's still got big flaws, rooted in your insistence on 60 as always being a control bid. In MOST cases, it works, but it's not logical in too many others. North opens 50; East bids 57. South bidding 60 as a control bid, is terrible.

South doesn't HAVE TO use the Hard 60 Bid option. The Shutout Bid of 60 is there as a choice to stop the 20 Meld Bids and suggest Strength / Intention of Captaincy.
South bidding 58 allows West to squeeze in a Meld Bid (not that they need it). Depending on what West does, North may still have a chance to Meld Bid or give a cheap Checkback Bid.
South bidding 60 tells North to bow out; and West is disallowed a 20 Meld Bid (not that they needs it).

Please give another situation if I have not explained why the system still works here.
Do you want South to use a 60 Control Bid? or do you want to give a 30 Meld Bid?
Because East-West has quite a meld advantage -- there is no point trying to cut off the meld bidding with a 60 bid.
If South wants to give a 30 Meld Bid, then 65 is the right call (3 steps, 8 points, adding ~20 meld to North-South Bid Limit.


(09-09-2013, 01:27 PM)ToreadorElder Wrote:  I also hate losing the aces bid as the first bid...because you have no way of ever showing them. This is a terrible flaw. You're not just losing a small selection of hands any more; you lose all the hands where you have aces and 30 meld. One can usually show both aspects, and this can be hugely important.

There's no effective 'deflation' advantage in not giving the aces bid in this situation, where there's been no prior bid. You've got 8 bloody steps to show meld. Smile

This is just difference in opinion. I have decided that I don't miss the Single Aces Around Bid. When there are 16 Aces in a deck and 4 people at the table, the average number of aces in each person's hand is 4. If the average number of Aces is 4 and Aces Around only clearly states 4 Aces, then I don't really need a bid that says "I have an average number of Aces in my hand." If the combination of Aces and meld is enough to give a Meld Bid, give the Meld Bid. The Aces Around will be presented to the table at meld counting time anyhow; so the advantage of knowing for the playing round is not lost.
My system design will have strengths and weaknesses versus the CABS. I understand that you feel this is a weakness.

This is literal deflation as it does shift all bidding down one in any case where the 51 Single Aces Bid would have been called.
Additional deflation is seen when a bidder only needs one turn to convey his level of Support; where separately showing Aces and 30 meld takes two turns.


(09-09-2013, 01:27 PM)ToreadorElder Wrote:  You have 3 different approaches to translating number of steps to a meld bid, when the bidding remains under 50. How can this NOT be confusing?

Do I have 3 different approaches? Please explain.
What I mean the grid to say is:
1. Find the light grey column with your desired Bid Type. (Reference the grey row that starts with Bid Information)
*The yellow row merely gives the formula. (If the result of the calculation = 60 but the column disallows it, then add 1 step.)
2. Find the light blue row with the appropriate Last Bid.
3. The intersection of the column and row is the correct bid(s)

*Note, If your partner is no longer in the bid, all bids are Control Bids and can be a single step or as high as your Bid Limit.

This is pretty straight forward don't you think?


(09-09-2013, 01:27 PM)ToreadorElder Wrote:  Another problem: too many of these bids, are meld bids. If partner gave you meld first, then jumps to 60 or higher should generally be shutout bids. On this auction:

pard 53
RHO 54

60's not quite high enough; it allows LHO to jump to 70 more easily when he's got 30. 65 gives him more problems, and 70 gives him MUCH more problems.

BTW: the same reason why jumping from 60 to 70, can't show 20, often applies for a jump from 70 to 80...it can't show 30 because that will often be too high.

Good argument. It is true that my system doesn't not provide a better Shutout Bid than 60 while your partner is still in the bidding.


(09-09-2013, 01:27 PM)ToreadorElder Wrote:  
rakbeater Wrote:58, 59, pass, 65 - Again, I don't think this should ever happen, because if you can bid 59 you should always bid 60 anyway.

Why not? First, why have 2 bids that mean the same thing? Second, if you bid 60 over the 58, then your partner can never show 20...just 30.

I touched on this in the above text of this post. The two bids do slightly different things, in what they mean or what they disallow.


(09-09-2013, 01:27 PM)ToreadorElder Wrote:  Insofar as being intolerant...don't try to introduce language and terminology naked. Explain what you mean by it, in that post. In the absence of such, all you do is confuse the issue with that language, and it *doesn't* mean anything.

Sheesh, I was trying to find a formula for why Meld Bidding 20 didn't work after 60, and why it works before 60.
It is clear that you are not interested in taking my ideas and trying to make them work.
You are only finding problems and nay-saying.
I am sure you are smart enough to HELP me improve my system by providing solutions to the problems.
You're just not interested and that's fine, it just slows down the system's development.
It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing all your life. -- Mickey Mantle
Reply
#22
One quick point to make with my daughter literally sitting on my hip watching youtube...I don't see the point of the new system if aces around is eliminated. I thought that was part of the major reason why it was created. Also, aces around doesn't just tell the partner that there are 4 aces. There are stats that prove that if you have an ace in each suit it is much more likely that you have 6 or more aces (I forget the exact stat). Additionally if you know your partner has at least one ace in each suit, this can show a direct way through the opponents to your partner which is very important. If aces around is combined with 20 meld, then essentially all this new system becomes is a way to more accurately share meld at the expense of other information.

Now that my daughter is just stroking my neck and not inhibiting my typing in anyway, I can also say that I'm starting to wonder about a hard 60. It seems to create at least as many problems as it fixes. I will have to think on that though.
Reply
#23
(09-10-2013, 10:36 AM)rakbeater Wrote:  One quick point to make with my daughter literally sitting on my hip watching youtube...I don't see the point of the new system if aces around is eliminated. I thought that was part of the major reason why it was created. Also, aces around doesn't just tell the partner that there are 4 aces. There are stats that prove that if you have an ace in each suit it is much more likely that you have 6 or more aces (I forget the exact stat). Additionally if you know your partner has at least one ace in each suit, this can show a direct way through the opponents to your partner which is very important. If aces around is combined with 20 meld, then essentially all this new system becomes is a way to more accurately share meld at the expense of other information.

Now that my daughter is just stroking my neck and not inhibiting my typing in anyway, I can also say that I'm starting to wonder about a hard 60. It seems to create at least as many problems as it fixes. I will have to think on that though.

Yeah, all these solid arguments for and against possible alterations to the CABS has my brain working overtime. I keep trying to identify bidding conflicts, finding solutions, then dealing with the side-effects.
One reason I love the Hard 60 is its clear offensive message.
Heck, that's why I love the whole Preempt & Shutout Bid Group.
I love them so much I want to give more power to them, by finding a way to use them with higher numbers... numbers that get the bidder to or near his/her Bid Limit.
As TE said in an earlier post, too much of my bidding grid is Meld Bids.
One way for me to release the +60 bids from being Meld Bids, is to re-activate the sub60 Unlimited Meld Bid. This provides a receptacle for meld bids that would otherwise break the 60 threshold, and would make clear Jump Control Bids over 60 possible.

Anyhow, it's not worth mentioning all the tiny ideas I am floating right now. Better to wait and present them in a clean format.

Thanks again to rakbeater and ToreadorElder for their recent postings in my threads. It might be a while before I post again on this one, but that doesn't exclude anyone from voicing their opinions.
It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing all your life. -- Mickey Mantle
Reply
#24
Quote:ToreadorElder Wrote:
No, it's still got big flaws, rooted in your insistence on 60 as always being a control bid. In MOST cases, it works, but it's not logical in too many others. North opens 50; East bids 57. South bidding 60 as a control bid, is terrible.

South doesn't HAVE TO use the Hard 60 Bid option. The Shutout Bid of 60 is there as a choice to stop the 20 Meld Bids and suggest Strength / Intention of Captaincy.
South bidding 58 allows West to squeeze in a Meld Bid (not that they need it). Depending on what West does, North may still have a chance to Meld Bid or give a cheap Checkback Bid.
South bidding 60 tells North to bow out; and West is disallowed a 20 Meld Bid (not that they needs it).

You don't get it. Again. You always, ONLY think about 1 particular bid, and that totally without regard to the context. That's why this approach is so totally wrong.

South should RARELY!! even think of making ANY control bid. West has a MASSIVE information advantage, and the ability to jump to 90, because East has given a TON of meld. Ergo, South's first responsibility is to SHOW MELD. If he really has this awesome playing hand, 1, and ONLY 1, bid, should show this...and that's 58, because that doesn't show meld.

I don't much care about West giving meld...not in this construction. East gave so much that it doesn't matter.

In your construction, WHY??? would South EVER tell North to 'shut up' when East/West have such a huge information advantage? It's totally ridiculous, unless of course South's got a meld monster and a play monster...double aces and a big run, double run, that sort of thing. TOO rare to worry about. 99% of the time or more, the 60 bid is needed to show 30 meld.
Reply
#25
(09-10-2013, 05:36 PM)ToreadorElder Wrote:  
Quote:ToreadorElder Wrote:
No, it's still got big flaws, rooted in your insistence on 60 as always being a control bid. In MOST cases, it works, but it's not logical in too many others. North opens 50; East bids 57. South bidding 60 as a control bid, is terrible.

South doesn't HAVE TO use the Hard 60 Bid option. The Shutout Bid of 60 is there as a choice to stop the 20 Meld Bids and suggest Strength / Intention of Captaincy.
South bidding 58 allows West to squeeze in a Meld Bid (not that they need it). Depending on what West does, North may still have a chance to Meld Bid or give a cheap Checkback Bid.
South bidding 60 tells North to bow out; and West is disallowed a 20 Meld Bid (not that they needs it).

You don't get it. Again. You always, ONLY think about 1 particular bid, and that totally without regard to the context. That's why this approach is so totally wrong.

South should RARELY!! even think of making ANY control bid. West has a MASSIVE information advantage, and the ability to jump to 90, because East has given a TON of meld. Ergo, South's first responsibility is to SHOW MELD. If he really has this awesome playing hand, 1, and ONLY 1, bid, should show this...and that's 58, because that doesn't show meld.

I don't much care about West giving meld...not in this construction. East gave so much that it doesn't matter.

In your construction, WHY??? would South EVER tell North to 'shut up' when East/West have such a huge information advantage? It's totally ridiculous, unless of course South's got a meld monster and a play monster...double aces and a big run, double run, that sort of thing. TOO rare to worry about. 99% of the time or more, the 60 bid is needed to show 30 meld.

YOU are the one who mentioned bidding 60 in that situation!
Why are you chewing me out, when it was your idea?
If you don't want South to make a Control Bid, don't, it is an OPTION.
What a waste of time.
It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing all your life. -- Mickey Mantle
Reply
#26
No, what I'm saying is that 60 IS NOT LOGICAL as a control bid in that auction, and therefore I use it for the essential purpose: a MELD bid. Your insistence on always wanting 60 as a control bid, regardless of the prior bidding, is the great flaw. I'm showing auctions where 60 *should not* be a control bid, for one reason or another.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)