pilowsky

Especially the North robot, although the West robot can be a bit iffy given half a chance. Mind you, the other day all. four of them paused for about an hour and went to the bathroom. Isn't it about time to realise that the idea of assigning intent and UI based on pausing is a bit of a joke in the online environment where there are much bigger issues such as skype, telephone and zoom to worry about? A simple time limit for thinking is all that is needed. That's what chess clocks were invented for.

Gambling 3NT is never appropriate because it is not part of the GIB system. If you bid 3NT GIB will respond 6NT with the North hand. Here's one from yesterday. As for the robots making a poor lead, don't you check what your opponent's leads are before you start a game? In this particular form of Bridge the rules are as presented and I'm just following them as best I can. Which is not that well most of the time. I still do not agree with the idea of "this is bridge and that is not bridge". Even though I am playing against three robots (and I still worry about the quality of the North robot), in fact, I am still competing against over 1000 real people in a massive Daylong. To me, this is one of the purest forms of bridge there is. You absolutely cannot blame your partner. (except maybe the North robot) you are entirely reliant on your own ability. This is the reason I think the weekly Forum challenge format is such an excellent test. We all get to play the same set of hands. It's a shame we don't all try.

I bet it was the North robot. I've had my eye on him for a while now.

Here's a hand that just came up in a Daylong. [hv=pc=n&s=sjtha97dakq954ct2&w=s9753h865d6cak654&n=sa842hqj32dj83c83&e=skq6hkt4dt72cqj97&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=ppp1np2cp3nppp]399|300[/hv] Here is the link to my result. Here is the double-dummy. I think this is interesting because in third seat I took a chance with my nice diamond suit (and low HCP) and opened 1NT. I was hoping that if partner responds Stayman this likely indicates stoppers in the other three suits. I already know from practice that after a rebid of 3NT GIB will pass. Also, advanced robots make passive leads into NT contracts (almost always). If partner passes I should make 1NT. If EW interferes, I'm still good - I even have a 2♦ rebid. So, in summary, even though GIB doesn't play G3NT - this seems to be an effective workaround.

Well, interesting only to me, but immediately after the IBM reboot, the tinyurl functionality has returned fwiw.

Of course, you can play anything you like, but your partner is playing GIB 2/1. I have my doubts about the North robot. He once failed to take a trick and set the contract in 5♣dbld. Ever since then I've suspected his commitment to the game.

There is no point minimum for a Michaels cue bid unless you get a bad score. In which case, there is definitely a minimum. The formula is HCP - final score = > 0 is good. Otherwise, your partner made a mistake or you played badly depending on who got to the Forum first. At least, that's what Mr Google says. Equally important is the question of the apostrophe. Since the convention belongs to Michael Michaels is it Michael's cue bid or Michaels cue bid? Depends how well you know him I suppose. Search Results Web results Michaels Cue Bid Bridge Convention - Bidding and Responses www.bridgebum.com › michaels_cuebid Michaels is a cue-bid that promises a two-suited hand, with at least five cards in each suit. The convention is named for Mike Michaels of Florida. People also ask How many points do you need for Michaels Cue Bid?Michaels Cue Bid. Michaels is a cue-bid that promises a two-suited hand, with at least five cards in each suit. There is no point minimum for making a Michaels overcall, although obvious factors like vulnerability should be considered. Michaels Cue Bid Bridge Convention - Bidding and Responses www.bridgebum.com › michaels_cuebid Search for: How many points do you need for Michaels Cue Bid?

Yes, I see what you mean, smoothing averages of various kinds are helpful. These are different statistics from the R0.

Well spotted John it was a red herring in any language. Anyway, it sounds a bit like you are complaining that GIB does not play your system. GIB is the most obdurate, stubborn and obstinate partner available, along with every other computer program. Keep pressing the button the answer is always the same. non deus ex machina. In any event, I think that is why we all like Bridge so much. Unlike life, Bridge (especially if it is a robot) always tells the truth. It never lies. Although the finesse works 50% of the time, it does work 50% of the time all things being equal. It is when you leave the table then you have problems.

Ending with 44.91% and only 278 entrants. Congrats to the winner fachiru (current rank 25) with 74.32%. Where did all the regular contributors go? Nowhere to be seen. Not cool.

It's annoying, especially when you are paying in the Prime area so that you can practice. It would be great if BBO would at least respond to multiple requests about this. Possibly it is impossible/costly/bothersome to implement. Although given that it is normal elsewhere this seems unlikely. Why can't it just be another table option during set-up? I do not know enough about computers to know if it is difficult or not. I do know that responding to the request is courteous.

It is an excellent point that I have raised before. When playing in the Prime area it would be helpful if you could set the table so that you were Declarer even if your partner 'won' the contract as normally happens in robot tournaments. I have made this suggestion in "Suggestions for Software" before, but for some reason, that area of the Forum does not seem to be monitored - or if it is, there are no replies. It is also fun to set 4 robots against each other to generate sets of hands to see how robots play, but not for very long. Your point seems to me to be a valid one. Good luck getting a response.

To understand this better, please read the second link in my earlier post.

I think that you will find that the R0 is the index of transmissibility. Full-stop.Not just a component of it. The size of the R0 varies depending on the situation. In some situations transmissibility can be higher or lower. None of this has anything to do with death or survival, or anything else. See previous post.

The R0 is an indicator of transmissibility and depends on many factors. Here is a good explanation.https://theconversat...l-useful-138542 You may also be interested in this story about a group trapped on a cruise to the Antarctic with 1 infected individual. https://lighthouse.m...ptoms-new-study It is redolent of the story about the Louis Slotin at the Manhattan project who accidentally exposed his colleagues to enormous amounts of radiation and then used their location to study the effect, The R0 is an epidemiological tool rather than a fixed number. It is affected by the environment, and by the susceptibility of the individuals. If the individuals are all immune then no-one will be infected - this is why social distancing works. If the virus mutates and becomes more virulent then the R0 can increase. If people are packed together on Troop carriers as they were in at the end of WW1 then the consequences are disastrous.

No excuses this week. At the moment I'm only at 42.2% which is pretty ordinary. Here is the South hand for Board 1. Good luck. [hv=pc=n&s=saj92hqj7dqtcak95]133|100[/hv]

I would be very interested to know what people think about this treatment. After reading several books on Benjaminised Acol and Benjamin 2's I arrived at the following, and was wondering if it made any sense: 2♦ weak 2 in diamonds or 22+ any shape. If no interference respond 2♥ If Interference 0-6HCP pass, Otherwise respond as appropriate for weak 2♦ 2♣ Any strong hand not suitable for 15-17 1NT or 20-21 2NT not necessarily game forcing forces 2♦ until partner clarifies hand. 2♥/♠ weak 2 in hearts or spades GIB treats 2♣ differently with a 2NT positive response. Quite a few people use different ways of handling the response to 2♣. I like the forced 2♦ relay because it gives opener the opportunity to clarify their hand and right-side the contract. The 2♦ preempt has a lot of detractors in Sydney so I would be interested in peoples views. If it's not much use preempting 2♦ then why not get forced up to 3♦ as suggested here and also have 2♦ available for that rare occasion when you definitely want to go to game. That leaves the 2♣ bid available for a wider range of hands that might be closed out at the 3-level.

ignoratio Juris non excusat Of course, not many people seem to know that. Ignorantia juris non excusat[1] or ignorantia legis neminem excusat[2] (Latin for "ignorance of the law excuses not"[1] and "ignorance of law excuses no one"[2] respectively) is a legal principle holding that a person who is unaware of a law may not escape liability for violating that law merely because one was unaware of its content. European-law countries with a tradition of Roman law may also use an expression from Aristotle translated into Latin: nemo censetur ignorare legem (nobody is thought to be ignorant of the law) or ignorantia iuris nocet (not knowing the law is harmful).

That's a logical fallacy called a complete non sequitir johnu, I'm sure rumours of Leo's demise, who is the number one player in the world at the moment are exaggerated. Since zhasbeen referred to me as pilow, I thought s/he was having a bit of fun so I reciprocated. Kind of you to leap to his/her defence. As for the question of which is the better robot. I have pitted GIB against itself in the Prime club. You can guess who won/lost; every time. The question makes no sense at all to me. Bridge is a game played by humans. Even when we compete against three robots. I actually think that the challenge format is one of the purest forms of the game.

It's a trivial but fun point, Psyche was a Greek Goddess - wife of Eros (Cupid). Would you want to meet her in a field? As for a 'decent TD' wikiHow has some useful info on the best way to become a decent person. Here is a link. Treat others with respect. Be dependable. Avoid Judgement. Be supportive. Listen. Don’t keep score. Be honest. Don’t be Negative, Be humorous. Be forgiving, Be Calm, Be Encouraging, Foster empathy, Don’t be critical. Possibly you meant a reasonable TD as in the TD on the Clapham omnibus. Now that would be a different kettle of fish. The man on the Clapham omnibus. English legal scholar Percy Henry Winfield summarized much of the literature by observing that: [H]e has not the courage of Achilles, the wisdom of Ulysses or the strength of Hercules, nor has he the prophetic vision of a clairvoyant. He will not anticipate folly in all its forms but he never puts out of consideration the teachings of experience and so will guard against negligence of others when experience shows such negligence to be common. He is a reasonable man but not a perfect citizen, nor a "paragon of circumspection. ..."[21]. Of course, in America, it's different.

Hilarious, no, I haven't misunderstood anything. Playing with people I alert my bid as "15-18 any shape" this is not considered to be a psychic bid by the TD at my Club. Although if I do not say "any shape" then it is. "Psychic bid (also psych, pronounced to rhyme with like) is a bid in contract bridge that grossly misstates the power and/or suit lengths of one's hand. It is used deliberately to deceive the opponents. Normally, the psychic bid is made with a weak hand, overstating its overall strength, the length and strength in a particular suit, or both. (The noun is occasionally misspelled as psyche, through confusion with Psyche, a character in a myth concerning Venus and Cupid.)." Mind you, since Psyche was married to Eros I suppose one could be forgiven for saying that I love to Psych would be a wonderful double entendre, but only, on balance, if the double was not for takeout - if you see what I mean - so to speak. My bid of 1NT does not misstate strength, and in the Club (♣) I alert it as "any shape, so it's definitely not a psych. This raises the question: What is a gross misrepresentation of strength? Presumably more than 1 standard deviation from the mean? Taking 15 -17 as typical in SAYC and 2/1 the mean is 16 and the standard deviation is 1. Therefore you should be able to open 1NT with any strength between 14 and 18. I have been advised by many players better than me that they will often upgrade or downgrade hands in this way to bid 1NT or 2NT. Do you believe that these are psych bids as well? As for shape, a different system is needed to cope with responses. I was just lucky this time. Nothing is 100%. Except for Birth Death and Taxes, and my inability to become the worlds best Bridge player. OK, quite a few things are 100% sometimes .

Standard practice is that there is no standard practice. If you want to know how the robots defend you can get some vague idea by looking up the GIB system notes here. Without any information from the Auction Journalist leads are favoured by some (overleading) Rusinow by others. Most people would call this "standard" but not GIB so it really seems to be a matter of style. If you want to start a good fight in a Bridge club start the conversation by saying with xxxx you absolutely must lead x. Then just leave the room and come back in a week. Nobody will be left alive. Larry Cohen Australian Bridge Federation Jim Rasmussen False carding from the youth bridge federation (the second last kid on the right looks like me when I was his age!) And here's the Search term I used with a who;e lot more... Here's a video on signals while defending from Rob Barrington - a bit off-topic, but I really like Rob's style Here is what the GIB notes say about defense: GIB doesn't interpret your signals or make many inferences from the play, it uses simulations based on the auction. However, it's usually able to figure out that when you lead an honor, it's part of a sequence. GIB usually leads passively against NT (read the book Winning Notrump Leads to understand why). Don't assume it's leading its longest suit. When you lead, it doesn't assume you're leading your best suit, which is why it doesn't always return the suit like a human would. In suit contracts, GIB's opening lead is frequently a side singleton or doubleton, to try to get a ruff. When it leads a suit bid by the opponents, this is almost always the reason. Read the book Winning Suit Contract Leads for insight on the way GIB leads against suits. If it leads an honor that's part of a sequence, it uses standard honor leads (K from AKx, A from AK doubleton). If it leads from a long suit, it leads 4th best (but see above: it doesn't always lead its long suit). When leading from 3 small, it leads low against both suit and NT contracts. It doesn't use any signals when making discards, it just tries to make safe discards. In a suit contract it will frequently discard from a short suit while it has trumps left. Otherwise, it tends to discard from a long suit that's safe to shorten. When it's following to partner's opening lead, it will usually give an attitude signal: High spot card with an Ace or KingHigh spot card with a Queen behind dummy's Ace or KingLow in any other situationNote that it doesn't give count in this situation, so it's hard to know when you can give it a ruff. When it's trying to win the trick in third hand, it will play the lowest of equals. Otherwise, when following suit it usually gives standard count signals (high = even); an exception is when it's forced to play equivalent cards in a doubleton, it will randomize them because of "restricted choice".

In Australia anyway, my 1NT is not a psyche. 2♣ here would certainly be part of Benjaminised Acol or even just Benjamin 2's from my reading, so I guess I should have included 2♣ in the poll - I just did not think of it. Anyway, as has been discussed ad nauseum on the Forum, You cannot psyche a robot. There is no alert box and even if there was, there is no TD for the EW robots to call. Obviously I was just lucky that North had the spades. I could not have hoped for a better lay of the cards. As for 7NT, you are playing a 24 hour daylong against robots so you can take your time to figure it out. Nobody got there, and I don't think I would have, but I'll ask my Teacher on Friday!

Of course, 1♣ is an excellent bid, but since I had 15 HCP and a great looking hand, and hoping my partner would have a stopper in hearts I opened 1NT. Ridiculous. Good things happened. 1NT, 2♥ (Cappalletti),3♠,6♠. A good result for me. Not as good as if I had bid it properly of course. Double Dummy is here. Which begs the question would you find or make the 'optimal' 7NT which nobody found? The best score resulted from a 2♣ opening! I guess they do have 23 total points. Some did reach 7♠ via 1♣ but this puts the contract in the North hand where according to double dummy it only makes 12 tricks unless opps make a non-♣ lead. Here is the full traveller for the hand. The take-home for me is that this is a hand where I need partner to know that we probably ought to be going somewhere. But how to get that across in one opening bid.

No problem hasbeen, you can think whatever you want. In my still limited experience, GIB plays better than me but then so do most people. Leo LaSota consistently plays better than almost everyone else. You don't see him on the Forum complaining about GIB. When I do, then I might pay attention. In the meantime, I'll just keep trying to learn how to play better Bridge.