Scarabin

Guess you are right and my appeal to the "better angels of our natures" is naive.

Can understand you are trolling to provoke a reaction from Fred, but attacking Sheri is a bit too low for my taste and, I imagine, for yours? Don't you think you should apologize? I corresponded with Sheri when seeking a copy of BaseIII and found her a very gracious lady. Slainte, Ian

Must confess it took my breath away also.

"just find them interesting". They inspire me. Culbertson inspired me to take up bridge. Ginsberg inspires me to persevere with bridge programming. I thought I might learn more of them from other BBO members. Slainte Ian

Have read Culbertson's autobiography and also "The Walk of the Oysters". No issue with Culbertson or Ginsberg, just find them interesting. Both outstanding in their respective fields. Slainte, Ian

Agreed, and Culbertson died a long time ago, but, with characters who are larger than life, even old anecdotes can be amusing. Slainte, Ian

Cascade has an interesting point. I was not offended by Obama's acceptance speech but then I like America and find Obama, if anything, overly sensitive to outsiders feelings. That said I must admit to feeling saturated by the election coverage and found myself thinking wryly "this is what you want to export to the Middle East". By the way, if you say I should just watch other countries' news, I did, it does not help.

When I was active in insurance insurers met this problem with international reinsurance. Thus widening the base for premiums beyond the disaster area. Presumably they still do so. Slainte, Ian

Not to try to resurrect this but are there no anecdotes on Ginsberg or Culbertson? I glanced at Culbertson's Blue Book, written in the 1930's, the other day and was amazed to find it could serve as a very good template for a computer play engine.

Technically so but surely not malicious and mildly ironic? Not sure what punishment comprises but hardly merited. At least one of the targets took it in good part and scored a humorous response. Slainte Ian

bcalc also has a single dummy solver, although still experimental

There is also a "profile preview" bur I expect everyone knows this since it's visible to signed-in browsers.

Sorry , I did not mean to be critical. Usually when I discover a new feature I find everyone else has known about it for years, and tells me how to use it. I find Topic Preview useful for browsing topics quickly. As for how to publicise, perhaps we could set up a Topic for "new" features which members and administrators could report. Maybe there are no other unknown features but it would provide a central source which new members could browse.

I have just discovered Topic Preview. Great idea but could be publicised more?

Unfortunately I have discovered a flaw in my approach. I've been using tuition software as my source for examples, and relying, naively, on the author's analysis. However some examples require help from the enemy: defensive errors. This does not affect the original purpose of the software but mean it's not a good standard for evaluating robot play. Oh well, back to the drawing board. Slainte, Ian

Thanks, you have allowed me to state, and helped me to clarify my statement, that my SOA Topics are not designed as an attack on GIB or Mr Ginsberg. May I close this aspect of the Topic with a quotation from Longfellow (to all those inarticulate souls out there who feel I have dedicated my life to killing their sacred cows, this does not imply an attack on your favourite poet!): "Lives of great men all remind us, we can make our lives sublime, and departing, leave behind us, footprints on the sands of time." With your agreement I would like to explore a second aspect: the colourfull history of GIB in the world bridge computer championship - not because I have a secret agenda but because I find it interesting. GIB first entered the championship in 1997 but did not win. It won the championship in 1998 and 1999. I think it introduced Moscito in 1999 and I remember reading Mr Ginsberg's witty account of GIB confusing signoffs with relays and his wondering if the rules covered play at the eighth level. I think GIB was saved by an opponent doubling its seventh level contract. GIB did not enter in 2000 and 2001. However Meadowlark won in 2000 and I think Mr Ginsberg said it used the GIB play engine. A new program called Hoogli was entered in 2001, by Jeremy Claptrap, who described himself as a refugee form the Mossad hiding in New Zealand but was subsequently found to be Mr Ginsberg. An account of this episode can be found in the Great Bridge Links archives, written by Stephen Smith of Bridge Baron and by Mr Ginsberg himself. It can be found by Googleing Jeremy Claptrap Hoogli. I am sure Mr Ginsberg was happy to reveal this incident to the world and he would not resent my mentioning it. Now fairly harsh words have been said about this deception and it has similarities to entering a ringer in a race but I prefer to see it as a joke, even if not in the best of taste, and perhaps without due regard for the other participants. Let me repeat I am not trying to sell you anything but if you are able to add anything further to my account I would be interested. I do believe Yves Costel wrote about it on Claire Bridge. Slainte, Ian

I like it, but I will plead guilty to a third alternative: I was remarkably stupid to start this Topic. OK?

Please,please,please I really do not find Mr Ginsberg despicable, quite the opposite, he is charismatic, witty and amusing. That given he is also larger than life and what in Australia we would call a "stirrer". May I suggest you Google "jeremy+claptrap+hoogli"? At the very least you may find it amusing. To further explain my attitude, as far as I can judge Mr Ginsberg may be less than fair to Mr Levy who seems to have acted with admirable restraint, It's easy to criticise the terms of the computer championship: they certainly favour the status quo but they have been reached by concensus. Slainte Ian

My post has 2 main points: First: That I have no animus against Matthew Ginsberg, but actually admire him. Second: A statement that it is possible to recognise GIB as ahead of its time when first introduced but to think that it has now fallen behind the competition. These are followed by a warning of possible bias because I grew up in an era when modesty was prized as a virtue. I still think my post made these clear. Slainte Ian

Surely there must be someone out there who speaks the same language as me and understands what I am saying? I did not concede I had been taking cheap shots at GIB or Ginsberg. In fact I do not think I have ever done this. It is natural for innovations to be superceded: all I wanted to say is that I can admire the original GIB and still believe it has been overtaken by other programs. The point of my original post was to canvass other opinions, particularly from anyone who actually knows Ginsberg, even if they tell me I am mistaken. My original post was not intended to be bitter and neither is this.

One of my critics has accused me of taking cheap shots at GIB, and its creator, Matthew Ginsberg. This may be correct but I'd like to float a topic to set the record straight and seek other pollsters confirmation or correction of my views. First, I have never met Ginsberg or Culbertson but they seem to me to be similar: men of towering intellect, with great talents in several fields, but pre-eminently in self promotion. On the downside, they speak of themselves and their achievements in superlatives. Briefly, they are renaissance men of the twentieth century. A further point in common is that they are both innovatiors who have changed worldwide trends in minor fields. My experience of all innovators is that their initial work is exceptional, "out of this world!", but ultimately becomes superceded. I admire such men immensely but I prefer quiet, more modest achievers. In case you think I am overcome by hubris, my prime example of the latter is Fred Gitelman. Slainte, Ian

Thanks for help. Google does not find anything but your help inspired me to re-download on a newer computer, and it worked. Thanks again for your help. Slainte, Ian

I have come across another double dummy solver whose performance rivals Bridgify 104's. This is "Bridge Calculator" written by Piotr Beling and available from http://bcalc.w8.pl/ Piotr has also written a single dummy solver which I have downloaded but cannot run because it cannot find some DLL. I would ask Piotr for help but I do not speak Polish and cannot find his email address.

Oxford bridge also allows bids to have altrnative meanings. These are distinguished by priorities. In bid explanations only the features common to all meanings are described. (My maths are too rusty for me to decide whether this should be HCF or LCD?)

Thanks. Good to hear from you. Obviously we have completely different aims. You are concerned with real life and have to produce worthwhile solutions, and have to accept performance may be satisfactory rather than perfect. I, on the other hand can play with aiming at perfect solutions and have to accept these may never be complete. Part of my fantasy is to improve on every existing program, and that's why I treasure singularities like Oxford bridge allowing for options or Wbridge5 covering Vingte signals. Slainte, Ian