DrFell

Edit: sorry, a problem I was having, but I've resolved it

Would that have been enough to overcome the robot's natural inclination to lead South's twice bid suit?

[hv=pc=n&s=sq32htdak6caqj943&w=sk965hkqj94dj8ck5&n=sa87ha875d7432c76&e=sjt4h632dqt95ct82&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=pp1c1h1np3cp3hp3nppp&p=c2c3ckc6hkh5h2htc5c7c8c9cas6h7ctcqh4h8s4cjhqs7sjc4d8d2h6dadjd3d5dks5d4dqs2s9sasthah3d6hjd7d9s3h9dtsqsk]399|300[/hv] West, North and East were robots. Can anyone tell me how to include that in the diagram, by the way? (This didn't happen at my table. Sitting North, I bid 3NT rather than 3♥, and consequently suffered a ♥ lead for 1 down. Which seems pretty normal.)

Playing 3-handed with a robot, the player with robot partner is frequently shunted across the table to play the hand, whether they like it or not (I don't like it at all). And frequently when this happens, their chat target is changed from "Table" to "Kibitzers". Please could this be fixed.

[hv=pc=n&s=sqjt95hakqjt96dc6&w=s8642h7432dqt54c4&n=s3h5d632caqt98753&e=sak7h8dakj987ckj2&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=4cdr4hppdppp]399|300[/hv] This didn't happen at my table (my partner and I played a normal-looking 4♥S), but at one of the comparison tables. South was the only non-robot. The XX is described as 20+ total pts. 4♥x-8 was -2000. What was the worst robot call? I don't like any of East Robot's actions, but I think the final pass is probably the most egregious. (Let's not pile on South; whatever you may think of their choices, they worked.)

I have a small group that I play with regularly, and we often need one robot to complete a table. I imagine this is a relatively unusual use pattern, with either 2 or 3 robots being more common. I want to raise a couple of issues which impair this particular experience. 1. The new "human declarer" policy works well for 3-robot tables, and has no effect on 2-robot tables (assuming the humans play as partners). But it is less satisfactory for us, since the player partnering the robot gets no natural breaks. There is value to sometimes being dummy when you're playing with other people. It would be nice to be able to toggle this in the table options. But since BBO has chosen not to offer that, my alternative suggestion is that tables created via the "new table with 3 robots" button should continue to default to human declarer, but that tables created via the general "new table" button should default to robot declarer. 2. I have raised this one before, but I do so again. BBO can be temperamental about connections, and I get DC'ed fairly frequently. If the player with the robots gets booted off, it's a considerable faff to get things restarted, because both the other players have to leave the table, so that the one with robots can be "king". Then they both have to be invited back again. My suggestion (made here before) is that the "king" should be able to install robots if *any* of the players present have hired them.

On the new software, this is true. In the Flash version, they are better hidden: they are in the "all tournaments" section of "Competitive", but not in any of the specific subcategories. It took me two days to find them, because a) there was no reason to look for them there, and b) BBO failed to publicize that they had been moved (as far as I could see). These are robot tournaments, so why would anyone not expect to find them in the "Robot tournament" part of the site? Please put them back.

I posted this a month ago, and it has sunk without trace (no replies, no views apparently). So I am rudely going to bump it up, because this is the single issue most impairing my enjoyment of BBO at the moment.

If so, he got me. This was a $0.39 Daylong; I don't know whether they use advanced robots?

How do you propose I should beat 2H? And I don't understand why we would be at risk of playing 5C. I think we should play 2S or 3C (unless they bid on in H of course).

Can anyone tell me what went wrong here? https://tinyurl.com/yarao9pn

Is it possible for robots other than versions of GIB to be used on the site? If so, the situation is more complicated than I imagined.

Recently I have been playing at the casual tables frequently with one or two other human players, the remaining seat(s) being taken by robots which I have rented. That means I have to be the host of the table. Generally once or twice per session (or more) I lose connection and get dumped from the table. At present there is no convenient way of resuming "host" status: the other players have to leave the table and then be invited back. Could hosts be given the power to transfer the status to another player at the table? Alternatively, could robots be made available if any one of the players present has rented them?

Sometimes when looking through results at other tables in a robot tournament, or in casual competitive play when there are robots at the comparator tables, it would be nice to be able to tell whether the robots involved are basic or advanced. (For instance, this sometimes explains why other tables have obtained different results.) Clicking on the name of a human player at another table brings up their profile information. Maybe the robots could have "profile information" too?

It's not working for me ("Connection to voice server failed."). But I prefer not to use the new software anyway.