smerriman

There are two stages to Gib's defense. 1) It simulates hands consistent with the bidding/play so far, 2) it runs a Monte Carlo simulation with double dummy analysis and picks the card to play that results in the best average. I can't see how there can ever be a bug in 2). It's double dummy analysis is perfect, and there is really very little logic involved with running a simulation. Bugs such as Gib randomly throwing a vital high card really therefore have to be due to flaws in 1) - it must be making some inaccurate assumptions based on what has happened so far that causes it to think nothing it does matters. [hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn=smerriman&s=SAQ982HAQ5DAT85CA&wn=Robot&w=SKT54H93D962CT742&nn=Robot&n=SJ7HT862D4CKQJ865&en=Robot&e=S63HKJ74DKQJ73C93&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=P1S(Major%20suit%20opening%20--%205+%20%21S%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)P1N(Forcing%20one%20notrump%20--%203-%20%21S%3B%206+%20HCP%3B%2012-%20total%20points)P3D(Strong%20hand%20--%204+%20%21D%3B%205+%20%21S%3B%2018-21%20HCP%3B%2019-22%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203N)P3N(4-%20%21H%3B%203-%20%21S%3B%207+%20HCP%3B%2012-%20total%20points%3B%20partial%20stop%20in%20%21C%3B%20partial%20stop%20in%20%21H)PPP&p=DKD5D2D4S6S2S5S7H2H4HQH3CAC4C5C9S8SKSJS3C7CJC3H5&c=11]400|300[/hv] Fastforward to West on lead at trick 6. From a daylong tourney, so basic Gib. This means less simulations than advanced, but still some reasonable number. How could a simulation possibly result in a club lead being equal or better than any other lead? (Clearly not better, which means every simulation had it equal.. but surely that couldn't be.)

[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn=smerriman&s=SAK32HA975DQ3CJ87&wn=Robot&w=S985HK82DK6CAQ943&nn=Robot&n=SQJT7HQJDAJT542CT&en=Robot&e=S64HT643D987CK652&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1D(Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20%21D%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)P1H(One%20over%20one%20--%204+%20%21H%3B%206+%20total%20points)2C(Two-level%20overcall%20--%205+%20%21C%3B%2010+%20HCP%3B%2018-%20total%20points)2D(Opener%20rebids%20his%20D%20--%202-%20%21H%3B%203-%20%21S%3B%2011-15%20HCP%3B%20twice%20rebiddable%20%21D%3B%2012-16%20total%20points)P3C(2+%20%21D%3B%204+%20%21H%3B%2012+%20HCP%3B%2013+%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203N)P3S(2-%20%21H%3B%203%20%21S%3B%2011-15%20HCP%3B%20twice%20rebiddable%20%21D%3B%2012-16%20total%20points%3B%20partial%20stop%20in%20%21S%3B%20forcing)P4D(2+%20%21D%3B%204+%20%21H%3B%2032-%20HCP%3B%2017+%20total%20points)P5D(2-%20%21H%3B%203%20%21S%3B%2011+%20HCP%3B%20twice%20rebiddable%20%21D%3B%2012-13%20total%20points%3B%20partial%20stop%20in%20%21S)PPP&p=C2C7CACTC4D2C5C8S7S4SKS5DQDKDAD7DJD9D3D6DTD8CJH2HQH4H5HKC3D4C6H7&c=11]400|300[/hv] Something went very wrong with the descriptions here. Firstly, Gib's 2♦ apparently denies 4 spades. The bid itself seems fine. The main problem arises after Gib's 3♠. My 4♦ shows 17+ points. Yet there wasn't any alternative bid - the one I really wanted to make was a natural 4♠. Gib described that as.. a cuebid in spades. Incidentally, somehow 5♦ by Gib then shows less points (12-13) than its previous bid (12-16).

Yes, you don't have to finish a challenge in one go, you can come and go as you please.

It's pure luck. Not everyone plays the same hands, so to win you need to be dealt a couple of slams and go from there.

For what it's worth, I'm happy with either non-best-hand or best-hand. But could only vote for one in the poll. Others may be similar.

1. IMP 100%. As discussed in the other thread, "MP" is not MP, its BAM, and Gib doesn't even play BAM. 2. Non best hand, gives much nicer variety. 3-7 - whatever allows me to play as many hands as possible :)

smerriman 10 - m1cha 5 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:c7afdb48.91be.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1476415926&u=smerriman

1) Ah. Yes, I misunderstood what we were talking about then. Ignore me :)

I have to agree with gordontd's main point. If you go further in the main event than someone, you should be ranked higher than them, regardless of what happens after that. Anything else does not make logical sense. To me the simplest way to achieve this is to not mix losers from the group stage and losers from the knockouts. Just have the losers from each knockout stage continue on in their own knockout bracket. So the losers from the semi play off for 3rd and 4th; the losers from quarters pair up - the two winners playing off for 5th and 6th, the two losers playing off for 7th and 8th, etc. This means everyone who makes the knockout will end up playing exactly the same number of games, so keeps them interested, while the group stage can have their own separate competition to determine the lower rankings.

smerriman 21 - zebutin 8 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:776ef934.9032.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1476245710&u=smerriman smerriman 8 - barmar 29 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:182a75f6.9040.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1476251563&u=smerriman

Sure, always happy to play.

Nige1 won the last 51-31 as I tried to go for wild swings all over the place. Good luck in the semis! http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:e25b1343.8f6b.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1476160420&u=smerriman

I played disastrously in the third set against nige1, losing 31-2. http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:30c900f3.8eac.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1476078088&u=smerriman

Currently we have challenge a stranger, and challenge a friend. I'd like to suggesting adding challenge Gib. Identical to challenging a stranger, but Gib is at the other table.

Throughout the Gib challenge events I've noticed people (good players) using a lot of non-systemic bids. This is obviously to fool Gib in some way - but I can't make head nor tail or why, or why this won't lead to your own partner putting you in the wrong contract - and I know from experience that once Gib has an idea of a contract in its head, it's very hard to convince it otherwise. I can understand perhaps a strange bid now and then if you're losing and need to generate a swing, but that didn't seem to be the case here. A number of recent examples: opening 2H in second seat with xx JTxxx Kxxx Jx opening 2NT with a 5332 18-count opening 1C first seat with 5332, or 5242, or a balanced 10-count opening 1NT in third seat with Txx K AQxxxx QJx opening 1NT in fourth seat with Jxx AQxxxx AQx K responding 1S to 1C with xx Kxxx Txxxxx x making a capp 2C overcall with Kx AQxx Txx AQJx making a capp 2C overcall with Jx Txxxx Txxx Ax After P P P 1C, overcalling 1D with xxxx xx KJxx Jxx What's the general idea here?

It is Saturday for me :) But OK, will wait for now.

Any reason not to start the quarters as they become available?

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:05d8a6ab.8ba8.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1475746445&u=smerriman smerriman 24 - nullve 20 Wow. I was down by 4 IMPs after 63 boards, then took a gamble and had a 5 IMP swing on the last hand to win by 1 IMP overall.

nullve won our second set 25-7: http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:fbf65fc7.8ab1.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1475640772&u=smerriman

Set 1: http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:9f790f91.89dc.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1475549134&u=smerriman smerriman 42 - nullve 11

(That links is for people who can edit only I think - https://www.dropbox.com/s/3lsvffdakdu9q8a/BBF%20event%203.xlsx?dl=0 for everyone else.)

Wow - might turn out to be irrelevant based on how the other groups work out, but that knocks jeffford76 out due to being exactly 0.01 VP behind zebutin in the 4th place standings.

Hooray! That was fun, thanks.

I didn't deserve that at all - that one slam balanced out all my bad bidding/play in all the others. Other results: http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:f9956a72.87ed.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1475336684&u=smerriman smerriman 8 - zebutin 12 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:d611d03b.87e6.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1475333618&u=smerriman smerriman 26 - olegru 13 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:bdde9a96.87e2.11e6.8e99.0cc47a39aeb4-1475331859&u=smerriman smerriman 37 - ovncylmz 9 (some revenge for thrashing me last event :))

Status update: tojam2 hasn't played a single challenge nor logged into the forum in the last 10 days - not a good sign. There are 6 players who have only played 2 of their 5 challenges: jeffford76, nige1, broze, mkgnao, manudude03, elwood913 All other 23 players are either complete or have pending challenges against the above 7 (other than toast1 who has 2 unrelated challenges to go).