zhasbeen

I'm with you all the way when it is used the way it is now. Too much variety as to what kind of hand GIB can have.

In my opinion the biggest problem with this treatment is that we have no idea what kind of hand of GIB can have. Is it a solid suit like your example, or is it something like Ax xxx Kx KJ9765? We never know. This is just one more example of why GIB is such a difficult partner to play with. Personally, I'd rather it have most, if not all the values, in one of the minors. No broken suits please, but I'd rather make a 2/1 with AKQxxxx.

Barmar, Until now I wasn’t aware of any BBO staff (or contractor) who worked with the robots and is also a regular participant in the ACBL robot games. Since the largest fields and most (but not all) of the best players are in the ACBL Daylong fields, I’ve always wondered why a few regulars who post intelligent commentary so often here, but not play in those games. If there are some who do, they must be using a different handle than the one they post with. Knowing that you actually play in these tournaments adds a lot. Fwiw, I’ve never assumed that fixing GIB is something that could easily be done, or was even possible. There are hundreds of bridge players who are, or have been, programmers. My 3 regular partners are programmers and 2 of them play in the robot tournaments. If it was easy to fix GIB it would have been done a long time ago. What bothered me was when I read that BBO would be sticking with GIB indefinitely, with another comment that had a “take it or leave it” flavor. The closest I've ever come to programming is Excel macros. You are lucky that you live on the other coast. If you were on this side I’d be talking your ear off. I wish I would have known that you were playing in the nationals. I was there on both weekends for 0-10000 and A/X/Y swiss events. I live about 40 min from SF when traffic is not too heavy. Hopefully you will continue to post here

Hey Barmar, It does zero good to post issues, file bug reports, etc. It had been almost 2 weeks since anyone posted here, and months since jdonn has bothered to stop by (maybe a year or more?). BBO management either won't, or can't fix GIB's problems. Virtually all serious problems are no better than they were more than 2 years ago when I played my first robot tournament. Most of the regulars have quit posting, and the few that have stayed post less frequently than they used to. How do I know? I am probably one of BBO's most frequent ACBL Daylong Robot Individual players, and would bet that I have more results data than any other player. For example, you have played 208 ACBL Daylong Games at matchpoints since 12-22-2018. I can also tell you your average scores, masterpoints won, and how you did in relation to ANY other player when you were both in same field. Since you are a regular, I often have other info such as power rating, masterpoints, etc. Why to I continue to play? It is definitely in spite of GIB rather than because of "him". If I significantly cut down number of games I play, or quit completely, GIB will be the reason. No doubt about it. Other than that I think BBO has a great web site and I do believe that playing in the tournaments will help you become a better card player. The hands are usually challenging and make you think, plus you can download replays of any boards that you've played. Too bad GIB is such a poor partner, and I mean "partner" in the truest sense of the word. It often seems that he is programmed to make things as difficult as possible for us. I know, it's the same for everyone and probably doesn't affect matchpoint scores in the long run, but it sure does have a negative effect on enjoyment of playing. Drop me a private email if you want to know more. I won't post any other info about you other than what I just did without your permission; and what I do have is info that you have made public.

I would add inappropriate use to "bad". This particular use is recurring, and is one I've seen more times than I want to remember. I have referred to it as "tear your hair out cue bid" because it forces you to an uncomfortably high level. GIB also likes to cue bid opponent's suit with and without a stopper there. You have all suits covered except opponent's and GIB is cue bidding it. Does "he" have it or not? Tear your hair out trying to decide what to do. It would be nice if he would just bid no trump when he has a stopper.

Gib competes with this known 4-3 fit: https://tinyurl.com/y5aaa3t2 but not this one: https://tinyurl.com/y5z53lqn

Your response is both surprising and interesting. I assumed that GIB couldn't upgraded and not that BBO wouldn't do it if they could. It looks like the only thing will get them to budge is losing enough customers, or maybe something else like losing their ACBL deal. "If BBO were willing to change to a different base bridge program,..." by "different base bridge program" do you mean keep the same machines but hiring staff that is capable of significantly upgrading the programming?

I'd go so far as to say that GIB robots haven't improved one bit since I started 2 years ago, and there's little doubt in my mind that they are responsible for so many players leaving. However, I doubt that the programmers have much, if anything, to do with it. GIB is GIB, and once it's assembled there's little that can be done to change anything. What BBO needs is some new robots but I'm sure they aren't cheap. I was thinking they could add them one or two at a time and use them in special tournaments, possibly charging extra for them. Then, over a period of time, they would have a small fleet. Something needs to be done, that's for sure. GIB is my only complaint of any significance, but it's a big one. Other ideas, anyone?

Fwiw, I overcall the 5-card major with 5-1-3-4 in your situation. Even with 5-3-1-4 I would usually overcall 3S over a 3D preempt rather than takeout.

Playing GIB 2/1 in the robot tournaments 3C transfers to diamonds. Then north could cue bid 3H and take it from there. The way I play offline is to use 2NT as transfer to diamonds (kinda). If opener has Kx or better in diamonds he accepts the transfer with 3D. With a worse diamond holding he makes the cheapest response of 3C

MOST incredible? I think this beats it. Yes, Gib really did take a spade preference with its stiff 10 rather than 6-card diamond support for suit that I bid at 4-level. https://tinyurl.com/y4558nz6 [hv=pc=n&s=saj9872hadkt876cq&w=sq5h962dqcajt9652&n=sthjt873daj9432c4&e=sk643hkq54d5ck873&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=1s3cp4c4dp4sppp]399|300[/hv]

Good example of another bidding flaw that comes up frequently. Your side needs a club stop to bid NT and Gib has it as part of its balanced opening hand. What's the point in club bid(s) other than make things as difficult as possible for partner?

I had the same thing happen in ACBL daylong and have seen it on other days. Today I was able to get back in after 2 dumps and finish the game.

Always run your mouse over the call to see how Gib interprets it. I've learned that the hard way, yet I still make an occasional assumption that I live to regret. If you think that's a bug you ain't seen nuthin' yet. I find it a bit confusing myself.

For a few hours as of this writing BBO site is down. You can register for game but no hands are dealt. Also, the "Messages" tab says 48 but there are only 3 showing. Vugraph seems to be working though.

https://tinyurl.com/yyuosv7c [hv=pc=n&s=st2hak863daqt82c6&w=sj4h954d9643cakq4&n=sakq95hjtdj75cj83&e=s8763hq72dkct9752&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1hp1sp2dppp]399|300[/hv] I have so many more, and don't have to wait long to get them. Not that you know you have a cold game when dummy comes down here, but one thing you do know is that Gib must NOT pass with that hand. The definition says I have 12-18 pts and "he" holds 12 that includes the cards you see.

No sooner did I post the hand just before this one.. https://tinyurl.com/y2sl8sp9 [hv=pc=n&s=sak942htd73cakq75&w=sj6hakqj852dt2c42&n=sq3h3daq9864ct986&e=st875h9764dkj5cj3&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1hp2h2s3hpp4cppp]399|300[/hv] This is the same partner that will blast away to slam at drop of a hat--never mind having more than 1 or 2 aces. Dual personality, I guess. These aren't minor problems with the this piece of whatever this machine is made of. They are serious, come in all sizes and shapes, and are frequent.

Can you imagine selling out to 4♥ with north hand after partner has overcalled 2♦? Come on Gib. You've got 5-card trump support and 2 aces, opposite obvious heart shortness in partner's hand. [hv=pc=n&s=sqj82h4dakq875cj7&w=s74hat86d9ck98654&n=sa953h953djt632ca&e=skt6hkqj72d4cqt32&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=1h2d4hppp]399|300[/hv] Such a variety and volume of pain that GIB dishes out day in and day out. Would he do this as your opponent? Is there any hope of anything being done?

Wow, anyone who decides to play BWS had better be ready for some serious study. I played a simpler version many years ago, but don't remember those jump shifts being included. Does what I just read (I should say skimmed) translate to "any hand with 9-11 hcp and a 6-card minor" qualifies for jump shift response to partner's major? To go back to middle hand, board 3, the Jx of trump and a stiff heart is what tilted me away from the jump. I'm not saying anyone who likes the jump is wrong. It's just that as the one opening the major I would have no idea what to do after one of those jump shifts. Does he have a stiff in my suit and a stronger minor, a hand like board 3, or something in between?

I believe that Cohen plays it by a passed hand showing a fit for partner's major. I doubt that there are many that play it with any 9-11 hcp having a 6-card minor. Whatever the case I think that a system that the entire field is going to play, such as GIB 2/1 here, should use only the most popular conventions while keeping it as simple as possible. One thing that I do like about the robot individuals here is requiring everyone to play the same card. With everyone playing the exact same card, with the the same robot partner and opponents, it reduces the game to card play and decision making only. This is about as a true of a test as you can get. I try to keep in mind that "it's the same for everyone" when I become frustrated with Gib's many glitches, although it does take a lot of the fun out the game. However, over a period of many games player scoring averages will be determined by the number of errors they make.

I would have no problem taking a 2S preference after 2H rebid by opener. My feeling is that the odds are we don't have a game if he can't bid again. I have a good hand for 1NT response but it's not a monster. Not all hands are going to fit so well as these 2 after 1S-3D. That said, I could change my mind, but for now I would be more comfortable with narrower range of hand types for an invitational jump. #3, 2♣ isn't an opening bid.. it's a GF 2/1. Yes, yes, of course. I think I'll leave now...

I like 1NT response for both 1 and 2. For 2 I don't like the jump with broken diamond suit, outside ace, and Jx for parnter's major. For a bid that takes up so much space I believe it should suggest litte or no support for partner's major and a better suit. For #3 a respected director said a year or so ago that it's against ACBL rults to open 2C with all the points in one, solid suit. However, I just Googled it and there seems to be some debate as to whether there is an actual rule. Larry Cohen says: "I do need some aces and kings--I wouldn't open 2c with, say 10 spades to the AKQJ and no other high cards..." One thing for sure is that a suit that good is not invitational :)

I'll delete this if you think I should, but is loses a lot when seen all at once. I new the general rule is one diagram at a time. I do not care for the this treatment--at all. You never know if you'll be getting solid suit, a broken suit with aces outside, or something in between. How do you like that last one?!! [hv=pc=n&s=st7542hajt54dkck9&w=sa9h97dq7652cqj43&n=sk8hk82d43cat7652&e=sqj63hq63dajt98c8&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=p1sp3cppp]399|300[/hv] [hv=pc=n&s=sakt652hqj54djck6&w=sq98ha3dkq74cqt73&n=sj4h7dat8632ca542&e=s73hkt9862d95cj98&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=1sp3dppp]399|300[/hv] [hv=pc=n&s=sj862hq983dakq6cj&w=skt954hk42dj983c5&n=s3hjd7cakqt876432&e=saq7hat765dt542c9&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1dp3cppp]399|300[/hv]

A very good point to NEVER assume. It's a cost me a few times when I didn't check the definition. In this case I checked after 4C and it said it was taking me for 4C, 5S.