pilowsky

Interesting, now I get "internal error. Could not connect to database. Try again later" (sic)

Hi, I'm in Australia and have had no trouble.

You are most welcome! But then who will do the voting over there?

That's a terribly perspicacious point.

South didn't double, South didn't pass.

The Traveller is not the Bridgemate. The Traveller that I am talking about is the complete list of outcomes. Perhaps Mike misunderstood me because although he has posted here more than anyone else, he has never played against robots in competition as far as I am aware. At least, he has no BBO masterpoints. That's OK, there are many things that I don't do either. On BBO the term 'Traveller' doesn't refer to the bit of paper stuck under the plastic board or the Bridgemate, or anything else. It means the final set of results on a server that you can see when I go to the myhands database. People like me that enjoy using BBO to play Bridge use this facility all the time to see our results and improve our game. The data is only available 24 hours later when the hands have been played 16 times. Strangely imo, although this Forum is called BBO, most of the stalwarts that populate it don't seem to like the platform much. I find that odd.

Well, I agree with you there. chess is a much better game as far as scoring goes. It has three outcomes and a clock. Disputes are rare. It has other problems though.

Well, the problem is, you probably planned to apply it topically instead of injecting it with a VERY LARGE needle and some sunlight. That would have saved billions and billions and billions...

It's a cruel world. This hand is much more interesting than that. North doubles. East bids 5♣. The tension in the room rose to a fever pitch. What did South do?

It sure did! more robotics for me to get used too.

A good start, but not really warm.

West, the dealer optimistically decided to bid 3♣ What happened next? What should have happened? What's the best contract? Which side should play it? Does it matter?[hv=pc=n&s=sakh9876dt7542c53&w=s83hk5dj6ckqj8742&n=sqt95hajt43dak9ca&e=sj7642hq2dq83ct96&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=3c]399|300[/hv]

I have been avoiding Lebensohl since I took up Bridge, but it seems that I will now have to come to grips with it. This hand just came up on my (self-) teaching table. I was practicing 1NT hands when after 2♠ Cappalletti the North robot bids 3NT alerted as "Lebensohl" which just turned out to be 4333 with no spade stopper and GLP. Here it is ♠K led make 10 tricks [hv=pc=n&s=sa7haqj42dq98cq74&w=skqj983htdj7653c5&n=st65h983dak42ck62&e=s42hk765dtcajt983&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=ppp1n2s3n(Lebensohl)ppp]399|300[/hv]

I really do understand what you are getting at. In fact my preference - hold your breath - would be for a scoring system that actually rewarded good bridge. This is not what we have at the moment. In this way, I think I am very much in support of Mikeh's perspective on Bridge. Mike says that he doesn't look at the traveller. I take this to mean that he sees the purity in each individual hand. That each hand should be bid and then played so that it reaches its optimal conclusion. I'm not sure how best to describe this philosophy, possibly it is how lawyers see the world. A space of equipoise where each side negotiates for a perfectly fair contract to the best of their abilities. There is a considerable charm in this approach. It is the 'British way'. It is redolent of old wine and quiet days on the common with the slap of willow on the red leather ball until dusk. I really like it. When I fail to make a contract or miss some tricks I should have made, those are the hands I savour and work over later. Tragically the scoring system that Mr Vanderbilt and his buddies bequeathed us has none of the artfulness to reward all of the intricacies that the game provides. Bid your way to exactly the 'right' contract played on exactly the 'right' side and you get no reward at all. Play matchpoints and the IMP's people say you're a fool, play IMP's and the matchpoints people say that you can't make overtricks. Pause to think for even a second, and West bellows for the Director. We're a bit off-piste for this part of the Forum so I'll stop here, but you get the gist.

That's very impressive. I use 'Ookla' to test the quality of my service and it's always been fine. Perhaps the others have some thoughts.

Hi, welcome to the Forum. I'm not sure about other people, but I have definitely seen this type of behaviour from time to time. I'm unable to correlate it with a particular time of day, or which server I'm playing on, but it has happened during casual play, and during robot tournaments so it isn't just a problem with the casual server. I doubt that the problem is at your end. It will probably all go away with the heat... Or when they inject bleach into the ROM. Possibly one of the people that actually work for BBO will have a real answer to your problem.

In a genuinely gymnastic gentlemanly gyration of goofy card-play, GIB offers me some excellent new bidding information and an overtrick. Question 1. In the following bidding sequence, what does 3NT mean to you? It didn't mean that to me, but now I know. [hv=d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1n2cd2d2hp3np]133|100[/hv] Part 2 in which all is revealed.

Sadly, you are not the first person to experience comments that they consider inappropriate and rude.

As much as I like you guys, you really need to know that this is all complete nonsense. If ever there was a need for Bridge clocks so that every player could play their cards in their own time without fear of idiotic arguments like this one erupting, it's an idiotic argument like this one. None of you is psychic, none of you is a mind-reader. The entire idea that it is possible to tell where any particular card is from a 4, 5 or 6-second pause is completely silly. I know that it has become part of Bridge lore (and apparently now law) that this is possible but it isn't. James Randi would have a great time with you lot. Also, peoples processing speed varies dramatically for all sorts of reasons. Some people may even have brief episodes of petit mal epilepsy that they are completely unaware of (incidence up to 4.6/100,000 apparently) or they could have sleep apnoea. Or if they are British they could just have eaten a bad kipper. Get over yourselves.

Some people regard 'robot Bridge' as the purest form. Taydog - Martin Henneberger is one of them. I'm fairly sure that he doesn't play with his eyes shut. In a sense, all games are the same. Even humour is a 'game', when Sacha Cohen sets out to make Rudy look like the idiot that he is, you can bet that a lot of careful thought goes into it. You can be sure that he gets a lot of satisfaction from the outcome. I also take comedy very seriously. I take everything seriously. Many of the things that I find out playing against robots have direct applicability to FTF Bridge, some do not. Some of the things I learned playing Chess have proved invaluable in playing Bridge. All Bridge hands are 'interesting'. How is that the 'wrong bid' gets the top score. I don't care at all if you ignore the problem, but simply saying oh it happens is not really an answer. That response is dooming you to mediocrity. It simply means that every time you play there will always be someone better and you will never no why and you will never care because you are doing the 'right thing' even though it doesn't get the best result. How does that make any sense? How is that logical? When you say 'most people' you are paraphrasing Richard Nixon's "Silent Majority" this concept is completely discredited. the silent majority does not exist. Like the American dream, it is as my mother used to say 'a pigment of your imagination'. Most people I know really enjoy playing with robots. They are never rude, they never complain, they never get tired and they always look after you. (that's paraphrasing the mother from the Terminator). Anyway, since my posts are a source of irritation, I'll stop.

You do recall that old adage 'watch the bidding'? How about 'Read the post'? All daylongs are against three robots, Watson. This is the BBO Forum it's elementary. Most of the people that play here play against robots. They are interested in how to play and defend against them.

You are correct, Bridge as you so cleverly put it is a game of probability. It is designed so that the highest score goes to the person that can make a contract in the highest-scoring strain. Just to give you a quick reminder that's No Trumps, followed by Spades Hearts etc. Your little friend who thought the bid was 'stupid' is slightly clever. He went to MIT where Oswald Jacoby lectured. Jacoby was a lot cleverer - we can talk about that later. Here are some simple numbers for you to ponder before bed. I have the AKxx of spades therefore opps have on average 1 HCP in spades each I have the Axxx of hearts therefore opps have on average 2 HCP in hearts each I have the AK of diamonds therefore opps have on average 1 HCP in diamonds each I have bubkas in clubs therefore opps have on average 3.3 HCP in clubs each (edit on account of genius friend of Borat) Totalling you guessed it 40HCP I'm playing a game where I really want to be in NT or hearts or spades which is where good old Mr Jacoby comes in. Transfers!! So I bid 1NT a lot in best hand tournaments because I know that I have the best hand. Here, all my shape is in the majors - another good reason to bid 1NT. What if North has spades? You'll be interested to know, probabilistically speaking that playing it in the 'strong hand' really does give a slight edge, maybe only about 1-2%. To be honest, I wonder sometimes if transfers are worth the mental energy, but it's what GIB plays so I'm stuck with it anyway. It's an argument for another thread. I have lectured in statistics to undergraduates and postgraduate students and to doctoral Fellows at multiple universities and reviewed statistics for multiple major scientific journals that I am a member of the editorial board of. I don't know how to play Bridge for *****, but when I was 18 I used the law of restricted choice to change the way that birth defects were diagnosed around the world - that test is still in use today. But thanks for reminding me about probability, it's good to know that it's important. I'll be sure to bear it in mind. Regarding 'the interest' try to focus on the problem at hand. 26 people bid one way and 1 person coincidentally me this time but it could have been some other lunatic bids another way. The interest is in the oddity. Odd things are interesting that's where novelty comes from. I suggest that you read Paul Feyerabend rather than Karl Popper if you want to understand how scientific investigation works. If I only pay attention to what people tell me I 'should do' I will a) not make progress b) not invent anything new c) not improve d) not have fun.

My modesty overwhelms me,

AND NOW. just when you think you've seen everything I avoid death in a defensive debacle that defies description. Here it is. East opens a sensible 1♠ I optimistically upgrade my meagre 14HCP 4333 to GKW and bid 1NT. West wisely doubles for penalties. There's an angel on my shoulder, or as they say in East Germany ein Jahresenedenfigurenmitflugeln: religious symbolism being illegal before the fall of the Berlin wall.

Come to think of it, I also like the 1♣ opening but for different reasons. I've started playing 'short club' with GIB when I have two 4CM and a decent hand. There is a small risk of being raised to 3♣, but on balance it usually works. I often upgrade 19 to 20 in 1st or 2nd seat with GIB, but never 18 because of the risk that North will go nuts - speaking of nuts, What I eventually decided to do was downgrade to 17 and bid 1NT. Here's what happened. ♥Q led for 3D+1. 26 other people were in 1♥ pass pass pass[hv=pc=n&s=sak82ha9875dakc97&w=sj974hqjdjcat8542&n=st6h64dqt87642cj3&e=sq53hkt32d953ckq6&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1n2c3cp3dppp]399|300[/hv] Here's the pbn