Douglas
2021-11-08 17:22:43 UTC
There is a Bridgewinners thread with a CommonGame oddity posted recently, and a number of comments which are so off the wall, but conventional current thought, I cannot but speak.
The oddity commented on is nine consecutive deals where West is dealt an average of 16 HCPs.
My opening comment is “so what.” While it is unusual, but it has only a beginning significance to an inquisitive bridge playing pair. You do remember contract bridge is a partnership game?
For instance, if partner was dealt 4, or less, HCP’s in seven or eight of those boards, I would feel a little picked on in hindsight if I were E/W.
The hand record for that evening had 36 total boards. It happens E/W were playing significantly better HCP cards that evening, to the tune of almost 3 standard deviations. That translates to 17 double dummy games and slams possible for them by my count.
But again “so what.” Almost everyone gets to play the same boards. It is who gets the best results from that playing who gets the rewards. At least, that’s the theory.
My guess from these results is that the CommonGame is still using an older version of BridgeComposer to deal its boards. Its latest version’s (5.89) help file reveals (finally) what an inadequate dealing algorithm it used to use. If CommonGame updated to version 5.89, which supposedly uses BigDeal now, they would align with most of the rest of the tournament bridge world. At least the non-cherry picking part. And would probably create less future oddities.
Douglas
The oddity commented on is nine consecutive deals where West is dealt an average of 16 HCPs.
My opening comment is “so what.” While it is unusual, but it has only a beginning significance to an inquisitive bridge playing pair. You do remember contract bridge is a partnership game?
For instance, if partner was dealt 4, or less, HCP’s in seven or eight of those boards, I would feel a little picked on in hindsight if I were E/W.
The hand record for that evening had 36 total boards. It happens E/W were playing significantly better HCP cards that evening, to the tune of almost 3 standard deviations. That translates to 17 double dummy games and slams possible for them by my count.
But again “so what.” Almost everyone gets to play the same boards. It is who gets the best results from that playing who gets the rewards. At least, that’s the theory.
My guess from these results is that the CommonGame is still using an older version of BridgeComposer to deal its boards. Its latest version’s (5.89) help file reveals (finally) what an inadequate dealing algorithm it used to use. If CommonGame updated to version 5.89, which supposedly uses BigDeal now, they would align with most of the rest of the tournament bridge world. At least the non-cherry picking part. And would probably create less future oddities.
Douglas