[blml] Positronic brain

[Tim West-Meads]

Herman wrote:
> > 
> 
> So let's assume that the UI suggests A over B. Then the AI also 
> suggests A over B. So with the AI, the player will choose A. Yet 
> since this is also the suggested LA from UI, you will rule against 
> him. I won't. Let's put it this way: You give the auction, without 
> UI, to a number of players. 3 choose alternative A, 1 chooses B. That 
> means that B is a LA. You now add the UI, and all four tell you that 
> it does not alter their choice, even if they wanted to cheat. You 
> would rule against this pair, I wouldn't.

You're a lucky man Herman - I don't think I've had such crystallised 
views from a consultation.  I generally get a couple of players saying 
"Hmm it's close, I'll probably bid 7H but 6H could well be right".
Even in your hypothetical situation the person who didn't change from 
option B will explain "That makes the grand look better but it's still 
only 90% rather than 75% - and playing with *** it's just not worth 
bidding 90% grands because if one goes off he's useless for the rest of 
the session, besides I don't expect this field to even come close".

I'm no way criticising the consultation concept - but I find what people 
say, how they say it and why they choose the calls they do *far* more 
useful towards determining LAs and what is suggested by the UI than the 
actual selection of calls.

Tim