thorvald

[hv=url=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=pn%7CRobot%2CRobot%2CRobot%2CRobot%7Cst%7C%7Cmd%7C2sk74haqt83dq9cqj3%2Csjthkdt53cak98542%2Cs9532hj6dkj82ct76%2Csaq86h97542da764c%7Crh%7C%7Cah%7Cboard%204%7Csv%7Cb%7Cmb%7C1c%7Can%7Cminor%20suit%20opening%20--%203%2B%20%21c%3B%2011-21%20hcp%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C1h%7Can%7Cone%20over%20one%20--%204%2B%20%21h%3B%206%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C2c%7Can%7Copener%20rebids%20his%20c%20--%203-%20%21h%3B%203-%20%21s%3B%2011-15%20hcp%3B%20twice%20rebiddable%20%21c%3B%2012-16%20total%20points%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C2s%7Can%7Cresponder%20reverse%20--%205%2B%20%21h%3B%20biddable%20%21s%3B%2013%2B%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203n%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C3c%7Can%7C2-%20%21h%3B%203-%20%21s%3B%2011-15%20hcp%3B%20twice%20rebiddable%20%21c%3B%2012-16%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203n%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C3d%7Can%7C3%2B%20%21d%3B%205%2B%20%21h%3B%20biddable%20%21s%3B%2013%2B%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203n%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C3n%7Can%7C2-%20%21h%3B%203-%20%21s%3B%2014-15%20hcp%3B%20twice%20rebiddable%20%21c%3B%2016-%20total%20points%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cpc%7Cd8%7Cpc%7Cd6%7Cpc%7Cdq%7Cpc%7Cd3%7Cpc%7Ch3%7Cpc%7Chk%7Cpc%7Ch6%7Cpc%7Ch9%7Cpc%7Cca%7Cpc%7Cc6%7Cpc%7Cs8%7Cpc%7Cc3%7Cpc%7Cck%7Cpc%7Cc7%7Cpc%7Ch7%7Cpc%7Ccq%7Cpc%7Csj%7Cpc%7Cs3%7Cpc%7Cs6%7Cpc%7Csk%7Cpc%7Ccj%7Cpc%7Cc9%7Cpc%7Cct%7Cpc%7Ch4%7Cpc%7Cha%7Cpc%7Cc8%7Cpc%7Chj%7Cpc%7Ch5%7Cpc%7Chq%7Cpc%7Cc5%7Cpc%7Cd2%7Cpc%7Ch2%7Cpc%7Cht%7Cpc%7Cc4%7Cpc%7Cs2%7Cpc%7Cd7%7Cpc%7Ch8%7Cpc%7Cd5%7Cpc%7Cs9%7Cpc%7Cd4%7Cpc%7Cs4%7Cpc%7Cst%7Cpc%7Cs5%7Cpc%7Csa%7Cpc%7Csq%7Cpc%7Cs7%7Cpc%7Cc2%7Cpc%7Cdk%7Cpc%7Cda%7Cpc%7Cd9%7Cpc%7Cdt%7Cpc%7Cdj%7C]399|300[/hv] and only 3 down. Now it was a bit interesting that north did lead the ♦8, but the simulation might have shown it was the best chance, Now look at the replay, where I am South [hv=url=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=pn%7CThorvald%2CRobot%2CRobot%2CRobot%7Cst%7C%7Cmd%7C2SK74HAQT83DQ9CQJ3%2CSJTHKDT53CAK98542%2CS9532HJ6DKJ82CT76%2CSAQ86H97542DA764C%7Csv%7CB%7Cah%7CBoard%204%7Cmb%7C1C%7Can%7CMinor%20suit%20opening%20--%203%2B%20%21C%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C1H%7Can%7COne%20over%20one%20--%204%2B%20%21H%3B%206%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C2C%7Can%7COpener%20rebids%20his%20C%20--%203-%20%21H%3B%203-%20%21S%3B%2011-15%20HCP%3B%20twice%20rebiddable%20%21C%3B%2012-16%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C2S%7Can%7CResponder%20reverse%20--%205%2B%20%21H%3B%20biddable%20%21S%3B%2013%2B%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203N%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C3C%7Can%7C2-%20%21H%3B%203-%20%21S%3B%2011-15%20HCP%3B%20twice%20rebiddable%20%21C%3B%2012-16%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203N%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C3D%7Can%7C3%2B%20%21D%3B%205%2B%20%21H%3B%20biddable%20%21S%3B%2013%2B%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203N%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C3N%7Can%7C2-%20%21H%3B%203-%20%21S%3B%2014-15%20HCP%3B%20twice%20rebiddable%20%21C%3B%2016-%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CD%7Can%7C20-%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CST%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CSJ%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CH9%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CS7%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CS9%7Cpc%7CSQ%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CDT%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CD7%7C]399|300[/hv] In normal bridge the Double is almost always asking for a ♥-lead, but this is not the GIB-style, but I betted on it was a miss-fit 3N and I had a ♣-stopper. This time North decided to lead ♦J, so it must have concluded something from my X. We dropped a couple of tricks in defence but still 3 down. (North failed to unblock ♥J, and I failed to realise that North could have ♦K) So when counting total points it might be a good idea not to count a void in partners primary suit - I my world 2♠ is an overbid with 10 HCP and a void in partners suit. 2♦ I assume would be New Minor forcing, so a difficult hand to bid. Now the problem is that 2♠ is defined as forcing to 3N so now it is no longer possible for the bid to pass the last winning contract 3♣

What is FL? As mentioned at other comments it might be an idea to stop all simulations around trick 10 and just check all possible combinations

"Knowing" from the bidding the ♠J is in North all plans lead to 12 tricks, but implementing a rule that if multiple plans work against all simulations, then do not select any with a finesse. Currently the bot just selects a card randomly - and in situations like this we only notice it when it goes wrong

When I test this on BBO the explanation of Pass and 2♦ for South is the same (No Major), but neither is telling anything about ♣s. If I Pass as in the example North also Pass, and if I bid 2♦ north jumps to 3N without any concern for ♣-stopper. After 2♦ denying major 3♣ is now 5+♣. The problem here is that the bot in this situation have no way to check for stopper

Nope, as the 2 is a small card odds aren't changed

How do you generate the output showing the analysis by GIB? I have search for the command line input to bridge.exe but found none. From Lorand Dalis AI-project I have: https://github.com/l...cripts/data/gib but the old document engine.txt that might contain the information is not available on Way back Machine

Good point, as that changes the odds for single ♣ in east, and the the 9 is the correct card

I am reading the old post (Just found out that I had a filter so only pinned and recent post was shown), and as many other I am impressed by your work. It would be very intreresting to get that error fixed. What an improvement that would be for all of us

It could be interesting to see the deals where the simulation shows discarding ♠A defeats the contract as declarer have 6 tricks in the bag and 3 tricks at dummy

I think you are right. On the other hand we have seen deals where GIB risk giving the contract based on extra undertricks, but perhaps it is different in declaring and defending

Looks resonable to me if playing a bit safe - wrong with singleton Ten, but right with a small singleton (3 times as likely), Also right with a singleton K

Follow the play and notice that at trick 10 dummy is high except for the last ♠. Still West drops ♠A [hv=url=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=pn%7CHuman%2CRobot%2CRobot%2CRobot%7Cst%7C%7Cmd%7C1SKJ64HAKT8DQ8CQJ5%2CSAQT92H432DT5CAK2%2CS753HJ6DAKJ2CT863%2CS8HQ975D97643C974%7Csv%7CE%7Cah%7CBoard%203%7Cmb%7C1N%7Can%7Cnotrump%20opener.%20Could%20have%205M.%20--%202-5%20%21C%3B%202-5%20%21D%3B%202-5%20%21H%3B%202-5%20%21S%3B%2015-17%20HCP%3B%2018-%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C2C%7Can%7CStayman%20--%20%20%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C2H%7Can%7C2-5%20%21C%3B%202-5%20%21D%3B%204-5%20%21H%3B%202-4%20%21S%3B%2015-17%20HCP%3B%2018-%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C2N%7Can%7CInvite%20to%203NT%2C%20no%204-card%20major%20--%203-%20%21H%3B%203-%20%21S%3B%209%20HCP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C3N%7Can%7C2-5%20%21C%3B%202-5%20%21D%3B%204-5%20%21H%3B%202-4%20%21S%3B%2016-17%20HCP%3B%2018-%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CH9%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CDT%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CST%7Cmc%7C10%7C]399|300[/hv] And yes it was a terrible declarer play that lead to that ending :-)

I agree that 4♣ could be the right bid, but a terrible explanation, and it would be nice with a definition of 4N as to play, after a new suit at the 4-level in an uncontested auction

I had this interesting board [hv=url=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=pn%7Cthorvald%2CRobot%2CRobot%2CRobot%7Cst%7C%7Cmd%7C4SA5HAKT93DAQJ9C94%2CSKJ4HJ2DK86432C32%2CST872HQ5D75CAKQT5%2CSQ963H8764DTCJ876%7Csv%7CE%7Cah%7CBoard%206%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C1H%7Can%7CMajor%20suit%20opening%20--%205%2B%20%21H%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C1S%7Can%7COne%20over%20one%20--%204%2B%20%21S%3B%206%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C3D%7Can%7CJump%20shift%20--%205%2B%20%21H%3B%2018-21%20HCP%3B%20biddable%20%21D%3B%2019-22%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203N%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C4C%7Can%7C4%2B%20%21C%3B%204%2B%20%21S%3B%206%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C4D%7Can%7C5%2B%20%21H%3B%2018-21%20HCP%3B%20biddable%20%21D%3B%2019-22%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C4H%7Can%7C4%2B%20%21C%3B%203%2B%20%21H%3B%204%2B%20%21S%3B%205%2B%20HCP%3B%206-10%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CS7%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CDT%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CS9%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cmc%7C12%7C]399|300[/hv] Now the north hand is not easy to bid, but I assume that a majority of players will go for 3N More interesting is the explanstion of 4♣=4+♠,4+♣, 6+ total points I have made some simulations and on [hv=pc=n&n=skt82h72d63caqt52]199|150[/hv] [hv=pc=n&n=st872hQ2d63caqt75]199|150[/hv] [hv=pc=n&n=st872h82d63cakqt7]199|150[/hv] the Bot bids 3N. So i guess that the right explanation is that 4♣ is 4+♠,4+♣,10+ HCP - unfortunately there is no longer a way to stop in 4N

I think all the "Declare only" boards are bid with the advanced robots

[hv=pc=n&w=shkqjt964dat864c9&d=s&v=e&b=5&a=1c?]133|200[/hv] The bot has 2N available showing 5+♥ and 5+♦, so I assume that will take precedence over any number of ♥. Now the bidding continues [hv=d=s&v=e&b=3&a=1c2np3np?]133|100[/hv] and the explanation of partners 3N is: Preference - 3+HCP I assume that is just a "Shut up bid" :-)

Is that information you can find in mb.txt?

Ah, yes, it was from the dayly "Only declare" tournament, so all bidding is done by the bots

I have noticed that GIB with a decent 5-card suit often competes, when the opps have stopped in 2Ma, but this is the first time I have seen GIB bid on a 4-card suit at the 3-level [hv=url=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|Thorvald,~~v3fakebot,~~v3fakebot,~~v3fakebot|md|2SKT73HK843DQ9CKJ5,S862HJDAJ632CQ742,SAHT97DT754CAT986,SQJ954HAQ652DK8C3|sv|o|rh||ah|Board%208|mb|P|mb|P|mb|1S|an|Major%20suit%20opening%20--%205+%20!S;%2011-21%20HCP;%2012-22%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|2S|an|Simple%20raise%20--%203+%20!S;%207-10%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|P|an|Third%20hand%20opener%20passes%20--%205+%20!S;%2011+%20HCP;%2012-14%20total%20points|mb|3H|an|Balancing%20overcall%20--%205+%20!H;%2010-16%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|P|mb|D|an|5+%20!S;%2014+%20HCP;%20biddable%20!H;%2014-%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|HJ|pc|H7|pc|H2|pc|HK|pc|H3|pc|D2|pc|H9|pc|HA|pc|HQ|pc|H4|pc|S2|pc|HT|pc|S5|pc|S3|pc|S8|pc|SA|pc|C6|pc|C3|pc|CK|pc|C7|pc|CJ|pc|C4|pc|C8|pc|H5|pc|DK|pc|D9|pc|D6|pc|D4|pc|SQ|pc|SK|pc|S6|pc|D5|pc|H8|pc|D3|pc|D7|pc|H6|pc|C5|pc|C2|pc|C9|pc|S4|pc|CA|pc|S9|pc|S7|pc|CQ|pc|CT|pc|D8|pc|DQ|pc|DA|pc|DT|pc|SJ|pc|ST|pc|DJ|]399|300[/hv]

As 3♥ is forcing a bid of 4♦ to show a maximum hand (remember the initial pass) seems quite reasonable, but then the explanation is just wrong. It seems that there is a broken connection between the actual reasoning and the description of the bid. I wonder if that is two different systems. I can see that when finding the explanation GIB calls a webservice http://webutil.bridg...2/u_bm/u_bm.php

I remember this combination Dummy Jxx Declarer Q I did play from dummy to Q and Ace and LHRobot returned the 9 from T9xx, and RHRobot used the King that i ruffed and got a discard on the J But still reading the lead conventions (Thx for linking) I still can't figure out why leading the 9 can be right

[hv=url=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=pn%7CHuman%2CRobot%2CRobot%2CRobot%7Cst%7C%7Cmd%7C3SKQJT9HKQT5D7CA96%2CSA7H87DAKJ963CQ75%2CS52HAJ64DQ85CK832%2CS8643H932DT42CJT4%7Csv%7CN%7Cah%7CBoard%205%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C1S%7Can%7CMajor%20suit%20opening%20--%205%2B%20%21S%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%7Cmb%7C2D%7Can%7CTwo-level%20overcall%20--%205%2B%20%21D%3B%2010%2B%20HCP%3B%2011-18%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CD%7Can%7CNegative%20double%20--%204%2B%20%21H%3B%2011-%20HCP%3B%209-12%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C3H%7Can%7C4%2B%20%21H%3B%205%2B%20%21S%3B%2015-21%20HCP%3B%2016-22%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203N%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C4D%7Can%7C1%2B%20%21C%3B%204%2B%20%21H%3B%201%2B%20%21S%3B%2011-%20HCP%3B%20no%20%21CA%3B%20%21DA%3B%20no%20%21SA%3B%2011-12%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C4H%7Can%7C4%2B%20%21H%3B%205%2B%20%21S%3B%2015%2B%20HCP%3B%2016-20%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cmc%7C11%7C]399|300[/hv] I think a part of the problem is that 3♥ is defined as forcing, where it normally is invitational, but strange bidding 4♦ and explaining it shows ♦A Missing an invitational bid the player at the other table settled for 2♥ [hv=url=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=pn%7CHuman%2CRobot%2CRobot%2CRobot%7Cst%7C%7Cmd%7C3SKQJT9HKQT5D7CA96%2CSA7H87DAKJ963CQ75%2CS52HAJ64DQ85CK832%2CS8643H932DT42CJT4%7Csv%7CN%7Cah%7CBoard%205%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C1S%7Can%7CMajor%20suit%20opening%20--%205%2B%20%21S%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%7Cmb%7C2D%7Can%7CTwo-level%20overcall%20--%205%2B%20%21D%3B%2010%2B%20HCP%3B%2011-18%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CD%7Can%7CNegative%20double%20--%204%2B%20%21H%3B%2011-%20HCP%3B%209-12%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C3H%7Can%7C4%2B%20%21H%3B%205%2B%20%21S%3B%2015-21%20HCP%3B%2016-22%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203N%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C4D%7Can%7C1%2B%20%21C%3B%204%2B%20%21H%3B%201%2B%20%21S%3B%2011-%20HCP%3B%20no%20%21CA%3B%20%21DA%3B%20no%20%21SA%3B%2011-12%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C4H%7Can%7C4%2B%20%21H%3B%205%2B%20%21S%3B%2015%2B%20HCP%3B%2016-20%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cmc%7C11%7C]399|300[/hv]

I have seen some situations where the bot leads the 9 from T9, thus making it difficult for partner, when leading thru Jx See this deal [hv=url=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=pn%7CHuman%2CRobot%2CRobot%2CRobot%7Cst%7C%7Cmd%7C1SQJ3HKJ83DQ85CAJ3%2CST4H42DJT642CK542%2CS8HAQ976DA73CQ876%2CSAK97652HT5DK9CT9%7Csv%7CB%7Cah%7CBoard%207%7Cmb%7C1N%7Can%7Cnotrump%20opener.%20Could%20have%205M.%20--%202-5%20%21C%3B%202-5%20%21D%3B%202-5%20%21H%3B%202-5%20%21S%3B%2015-17%20HCP%3B%2018-%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C2D%21%7Can%7CJacoby%20transfer%20--%205%2B%20%21H%7Cmb%7C3S%7Can%7C7%2B%20%21S%3B%203%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7C4H%7Can%7C2-5%20%21C%3B%202-5%20%21D%3B%203-5%20%21H%3B%202-5%20%21S%3B%2017-%20HCP%3B%2018%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cpc%7CST%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CS9%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cmc%7C10%7C]399|300[/hv] So thru declarer it leads the T [hv=url=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=pn%7CThorvald%2CRobot%2CRobot%2CRobot%7Cst%7C%7Cmd%7C1SQJ3HKJ83DQ85CAJ3%2CST4H42DJT642CK542%2CS8HAQ976DA73CQ876%2CSAK97652HT5DK9CT9%7Csv%7CB%7Cah%7CBoard%207%7Cmb%7C1C%7Can%7CMinor%20suit%20opening%20--%203%2B%20%21C%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C1H%7Can%7COne%20over%20one%20--%204%2B%20%21H%3B%206%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7C3S%7Can%7CAggressive%20weak%20jump%20overcall%20--%207%2B%20%21S%3B%2011-%20HCP%3B%203%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CD%7Can%7C4%2B%20%21H%3B%2012%2B%20HCP%3B%2013%2B%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C4H%7Can%7C3%2B%20%21C%3B%203%2B%20%21H%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CSQ%7Cpc%7CST%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cmc%7C10%7C]399|300[/hv] But here it leads the 9 Now here it doesn't make a difference, but I have seen this cost contracts because the other bot assumes the T is on the closed hand

After losing a Robot Challenge i looked at this board where I los t1 IMP [hv=url=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=pn%7CHuman%2CRobot%2CRobot%2CRobot%7Cst%7C%7Cmd%7C3SKQ52HQ5DA85CQ765%2CSJ643HT876DKJ4CK4%2CSAT9HKJ4D9762CAT3%2CS87HA932DQT3CJ982%7Csv%7CB%7Cah%7CBoard%2013%7Cmb%7C1D%7Can%7CMinor%20suit%20opening%20--%203%2B%20%21D%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C1S%7Can%7COne%20over%20one%20--%204%2B%20%21S%3B%206%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C1N%7Can%7C2-5%20%21C%3B%204-5%20%21D%3B%202-4%20%21H%3B%202-3%20%21S%3B%2012-14%20HCP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7C3N%7Can%7C4%2B%20%21S%3B%2017-%20HCP%3B%2013%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cmb%7CP%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CDT%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CH9%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CSJ%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cmc%7C10%7C]399|300[/hv] The first 7 tricks looks very normal, but at trick 8 the West Robot play ♠J but by counting the hand the bot knows ♠A is in north as north has shown 12-14 HCP. On the actual layout declarer can take the finesse so using double dummy it will not cost, but when simulating it is not possible to find a layout, where it gains

No I am just pinpointing areas, where the Robot bids to much, and a hand that have passed once and then is balancing, will not justify a raise by 8 total points. I am trying to be loyal to the bots system