dartagnan9

Thanks for all of the informed replies. Actually, to clarify, my question wasn't what to do in robot play, but more to discuss with my very real offline partner. (It's just that the example came up in robot play.) I'd argue, though, that even in robot races, where you know partner is, at best, the same strength, there'd still be a possibility of a slam, if you have a hand that would be considered too strong for a preempt as strictly defined. But AWM's statistical analysis speaks volumes. My partner agreed yesterday to stick to clear preempts, but those statistic, and the explanation behind them, make me want to reconsider. Great discussion. Thanks, Keith

Hi A little personal history. I learned bridge about twenty years ago, played seriously for about 8 years, then packed it in until a couple of years ago. In the interregnum, things changed a pace, and I'm constantly learning that my old bidding practices are out-of-date. So I'm wondering about opening 4 of a major. I'm fairly strict about preempts: very little strength outside of bid suit; good sequence of honors; not openable at the one level. But ... The other day I played a hand with 8 spades, AQJ and at least an outside Ace - don't remember the exact layout. This was a robot race. I opened 1 heart. We were vulnerable. Bidding was competitive, and with resolutely no support from partner, I declined to overcall their 4 hearts. I got a bottom. I was curious about how others bid, and found that, almost without exception, people had opened my hand 4 spades. This left me confused. How is partner supposed to know if it's a true pre-emptive bid, or a strong hand? You might belong in slam, but if a 4-level preempt in a major can ALSO mean 8 trump, with no side honors, how do I know what to do, as the partner. It seems to me that if you have the kind of hand I described above, you're better opening at the one level, and finding out what your partner has. So have practices changed? Many thanks! Keith

Hi, sorry, I meant to, but I was having problems with my PC. Here's a link to it. Have to paste it as text. For some reason the link tool in the editor is not working for me. Looking at it again, it's even worse than I remembered. GIB bids clubs 4 times, having only 5 headed by a Q, and 4 HCP in total. http://screencast.com/t/bKU1dNub And yes, I'm well aware I was on a wild goose chase by continually trying to bid my spades, but it was out of sheer frustration!

This has happened so many times, and every time it happens, I send a GIB report. Nothing ever gets done. Perhaps it's my own misunderstanding? I double an opening bid. I have an 8 card spade suit, and 20 points. My partner bids 2 clubs. I bid my spades. Shouldn't that show a strong hand in spades? GIB's response? He rebids his clubs, and will go on rebidding them all the way to grand slam, even if he only has 5 clubs headed by the Queen, and 3 HCP (or even less!) Like I said, I waste a couple of minutes of my RR tournament to send in yet another GIB report. Because they never respond to GIB reports, and nothing ever gets done, no matter how egregious the play or bid, I'm beginning to feel they don't even look at them. Or am I completely off base about what take out double followed by bidding my suit means? Now, even if GIB does not interpret it the way I do, there's still no reason to take me to grand slam with such a pathetic hand. So either way you cut it, it's a bad bug, which has been there a long time, and nothing gets done to fix it. It leaves one feeling powerless to effect change. I've yet to have a BBO response to anything I've posted in this forum, and since they won't do personal responses to GIB reports, you're left feeling that BBO is resistant to fixing things, and has no interest in listening to the community. Thanks, Keith

I appreciate why you might not want to respond and take up a lot of time in to and fro, but until I found out about the "report GIB" right-hand click off the hand, I thought my only option to report things like this (which happen virtually every tournament) was to post here. If you rarely respond, it begins to feel for me like a futile exercise since I don't know if anybody at BBO cares. Perhaps you could post a sticky note on this forum explaining your policies on responses, and also highlighting the "report GIB" button? (I apologize if such a note is already there, and I just missed it.) Keith

Oh! Didn't know about that. That's perfect!

Maybe your posts are particularly interesting :)

Hi, please see image. I had a strong heart hand, which I opened 1H. East overcalled 2 diamonds. I jumped to 3 hearts. For some reason, my partner, instead of making the obvious 4 heart bid, showed his club suit. He had 5 total points, and two card support for hearts. This is bad bidding, purely. By the way, could people please comment on the following: how often do you get a response from BBO on posts like this? I feel as if it's quite rare - at least for me. Which leaves me feeling kind of powerless to do anything, or help improve things. Have others had this experience, or is it more likely just my own perception? Thanks, Keith P.s. I realize it would have been better to attach whole hand, but I was in the middle of the robot race, and had to act quickly. http://www.brokenwhole.com/images/temp/oct102010/ScreenShot.jpg

Then shouldn't there be a simple coding step that says: oh, I only have one card in that suit. Therefore no need to do any simulations?

The problem is still there, and I'm not aware that BB responded. I didn't expect them to, which is disappointing. However, I think something has changed - they're faster than they were, although still the same occasional meaningless pause (e.g. when playing the last card!) It's just not as bad as it was a few weeks ago, it seems to me.

I don't mean to be overly feisty, but I'm convinced it has nothing to do with the user's network. While the GIB is hesitating to play, I can often see somebody else's score increasing. I couldn't receive that information without network latency, but then not receive the information that makes the card play. Also the dynamics of how this happen also argue against it being anything to do with network latency. It never ever happens once the play has speeded up. Only in the first half of the hand - but even their, it's frequently not due to any difficulty in making a choice of play when the play is very obvious. Can I suggest that the developer try it himself? I don't know if the server is local to you, so suggest playing where it's not - i.e. at a cafe, or something. Are you able to capture debugging information about the time each GIB play takes? That would show you the same thing. Maybe that would help understand what's happening while it delays. Thanks, Keith P.s. I just want to reiterate: I'm convinced this is a software issue, not a network issue. Or, at the very least, if it's a network issue, it's not dependent on the user's network, since I experience the same delays even on a very fast T1 line at a university. Same delay whether I'm playing on slow WiFi at Starbucks, or my much faster connection at home.

Thanks for all the points and answers etc. I know I was mad when I posted it, and I could have used more temperate language. I'm a long-term software developer too, and I like to give feedback in the hope that things can be improved for everybody. But I "concede" that the carrot is better than the stick :) "Can dartagnan9 please at least concede that he should have his facts right before posting complaints?" & "You should be able to gather the whole sordid mess using My Hands." I'm happy to concede that I was wrong. But I did forewarn: I said in my msg that "I believe" my opening bid was 1H. I should have stated that more clearly, but since I couldn't see it, and it was not (despite what the above says) in "My Hands", I couldn't be sure, and that seemed the most logical deduction. But yes, I was wrong. For some reason, almost always, I don't find the RR$.25 hands in My Hands. Or is it just that they arrive late? I thought I checked the next day, once, and still couldn't find it. Yes, I should have just given up and let GIB have his blessed 5D, but I was intent on hammering on the head at the time and didn't think to stop :) Thanks all, Keith

I feel as if I'm hitting a brick wall. Can somebody tell me: does anything ever come of bug discussions in terms of changes? It's frustrating to see the same things repeated over and over again, and nothing happens. I did a screen capture since I didn't want to waste time trying to save the hand to BBO while the contract was going south. The screen capture does not show the entire bidding sequence. http://www.brokenwhole.com/misc/ScreenShot2.jpg I believe the only missing bid is my opening bid of 1♥. From there it was lunacy. GIB wouldn't accept that I clearly had a superstrong heart hand which I bid 5 times (including jumping to game), and it kept preferring its stupid, weak diamond hand all the way to grand slam in diamonds! As far as it knew, I had no diamonds at all! Yet it did have support for hearts! Can a bug be more clear than this? This sort of thing has happened to me numerous times. Can the GIB developers please at least concede there's a problem here? Keith Adams

Well, it would be nice if a developer could explain it. It's certainly true that it's only in the first half, before it speeds up faster than the eye can see! But I doubt it's because it's trying to figure out the play. Because it also happens when the GIB defender is humming and hawing about playing a card. He doesn't have nearly as much to figure out as the declarer, yet can take just as long to decide on playing in a situation where it obviously doesn't matter which card he plays! Thanks, Keith

That's great to know about the viewer link, thanks! Maybe it's because it's the end of a long Saturday, but I can't follow the odds calculations, but I'm sure you're right, ahydra - statistics & probability were never my strong suit (no pun intended)! Just one point though, and then I'll shut up. It may be that this is the human judgment that comes in: it seems unlikely to me that East would have led the jack without the 10. It's impossible to calculate those odds because it depends on your assessments of how many people would play the jack in that situation lacking the 10. My assessment is that few would, but I'm almost certainly not as experienced in the science of opening leads as many on the board, so I grant I could be wrong. But if you take my assessment as correct, then the only time it's worth taking the finesse is if East has J 10 only. And to me it seems vastly unlikely somebody would lead from J 10 doubleton against NT. Of course, if I'd included the link, it would have been clearer since you could judge whether the distribution in the other suits precluded not leading clubs in the first place. I suppose this is what makes bridge so interesting! Thanks Keith

Hi, if you could attach screen captures, that would be a big help, since this bug is obvious. Or if you could at least use some BBO function to reference a game that other people could then see. North declarer in 3NT (bidding South 1♠, North 1NT, South 2 ♦, North 2NT, South 3NT). Bidding gave no information about cards in opps' hands. 1 round of clubs is played. East opens the lead with the J clubs, which clearly implies he has the 10 clubs too. East won with the Ace, leaving the following: North (Declarer) K,Q,9,3 East 10,7 South 6 West 4,5 East leads 5 clubs, North plays 9. hoping to finesse 10, East takes it with 10, last club removed from dummy. What are the odds that's the correct play? They're very easy to calculate. The possible distribution, after 5 is led, is West East 0 3 - this is the only scenario where the finesse needs to be played 1 2 2 1 3 0 So the odds of that being the right play are 25%. Now, if East had J 10 xx before his initial lead, then the finesse is going to fail anyway so might as well not try it since the odds of it being the right play are only 25%. Moreover, the opening lead clearly indicated the 10 in East's hand, in which case, if he didn't have the J, then not trying the finesse is the correct play. It sounds complicated, but it was blindingly obvious to see the right play, and exceptionally infuriating to see GIB make the unnecessary finesse. Now if I can calculate the odds so easily, and illustrate the logic behind deciding where the 10 clubs is likely to be, why can't GIB? This is not the first time I've seen unnecessary finesses. I think there's something wrong in the algorithm which triggers trying a finesse. Thanks, Keith P.s. I have the jpg, if there's a way to post it.

I experience a systematic pattern of bidding/play delay in the robots, and I'm sure it can't be just me, because of the pattern. - If robot in any direction is the declarer, there will be multiple long pauses doing absolutely nothing - sometimes it seems like 30 seconds. And these pauses come from both offense and defense. - However, if I 'm the declarer, there are significantly fewer pauses from all players. These things are computer programs. There's no earthly need for them to take 30 seconds to figure out a bid or play. And, in any case, that's not what's happening, because sometimes there'll be that long delay even when they only have one possible card-play! Especially when playing the race, it's extremely infuriating. You see two minutes left on the clock, and you're in a contract that will likely give you the tournament. Then you watch as a defending robot hesitates for 30 seconds over whether to play the 2 clubs or the 2 clubs (clubs were led, and he only has one!) You anxiously look at the clock ticking away, and, there it goes - hand is unfinished and you don't win. It would be nice if this could be explained by the developers. The only likely explanation I can imagine is that the delays are programmed. The play speeds up dramatically in the second half of each hand. When I've reported this in the past, I've been told it's due to delay on my side of the network. But that wouldn't explain the pattern I see. Why does it always delay dramatically, but only in the first half of the hand? And why is the pattern different, depending whether a robot is defending against me, or against my robot partner (this is where the long pauses come in.?) If a developer is reading this, please give a response. Otherwise I'm going to get kicked out of my own house for screaming at my computer :) Keith

Sitting South, opposite Azamali24, the opening bidder, vulnerable, I had a very powerful hand (23 high card points). When my partner opened 1NT I was amazed - his minimum 15 pts+my 23=38. So, naturally, I did a sextuple jump to 7NT. Between us, we had all aces, kings, queens, half the jacks and all 6 top diamonds, giving us enough winners for 16 tricks! When East doubled (on the basis of a less than powerful hand - 1 pt, but a nice long ♣ suit - errm, headed by the 10 - I'm sure it seemed a good idea at the time B)), I redoubled, and we went on to make what I think is the max score, 2980 pts. I've been at 7NT vul before, but never expect again to be there redoubled, since it's doubtful anybody would do so without an ace, or possibly a king. What was somewhat strange was that my partner didn't claim, although perhaps he wanted the pleasure of laying out 13 tricks. Does anybody know how frequently this score is attained? See link to hand below. Also attaching as an image. Keith http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/5601/screenshotjd.jpg 7NT vul rdbld 2980 points

Well, I can only conclude that I'm continually unlucky. I'm a good, intermediate player, who plays the cards well. The other day, my first six hands were all part scores, mostly at the 1 or 2 level. It's really a waste of money. I don't understand why all players cannot get the same cards. You say luck evens out, but since there are often 30 or more players per tournament, that means you spend $30 and only once will you get the best set of hands. It's fine for you - people keep coming back in the hope that this time they'll get the good hands. Meanwhile, you accumulate money each time. In a regular tournament, or even club play, most times, everybody gets the same set of hands, why not robot races? Thanks for responding, but I'm not convinced. Keith

Hi I've played in the robot race tournaments quite a few times, and the robots often stick for quite a few seconds in the first half of each hand. If you end up as dummy, a game can be interminable. I know it's not my connection, because I don't see this with live play, and that wouldn't explain how they magically speed through the second half of each board. Can you please clarify? Does everybody get the same hands in a robot race with best hand for South. I can't see how it's possible. I just played a tourney, and had only four boards where more than a part score was possible, and those part scores were barely made each time. Early on, I had three part-score hands as the first three hands. I could see another player had already bid and made a slam. It seems, then, completely arbitrary. The player who gets the best hands is most likely to win. Thanks, Keith

Hey Looking for an offline partner for tourney/club play. Bev Hills bridge club, most likely. Live in Hollywood - West Side, the valley up to Sherman Oaks, Burbank and Glendale, downtown - pref. Only looking for friendly partner, but also somebody seeking to improve. Not sure this is the correct forum, so won't write more unless I hear from someone. Thanks! Keith

I'm resuming the game after a 10 year break, and am looking to improve, and play regularly in order to cement the rarer conventions into my neuron-challenged brain :) I'd like to play offline, but also online now and then - good practice. I'd say that I play SAYC, or rather, used to, but I probably need a refresher course. Have been playing several months on BBO. Intermediate player. I play the cards pretty well, I think, and am a fairly confident bidder, knowing when to play it safe and when to be adventurous. Haven't had a lot of good results in tourneys because of the lack of a partner. I'm looking for somebody who is also keen on improving, and is probably more advanced than me. I'm bright, funny, polite and friendly, and look for the same qualities. I live in Hollywood, but can easily play anywhere in the coridoor from Hollywood to Brentwood, and would consider going further afield. Brief list off the top of my head of what I'm used to playing. I've realized, though, that in skipping 10 years of play, a couple or more of my bids may now be out of fashion. Definitely looking to improve. Here goes below. Thanks! Keith - Stayman - Transfers (including to minors) - Gerber - Blackwood (usually regular, but would like to play Roman Key Card) - Negative and takeout doubles - strong 2 clubs, 22 HCP, or 8 quick tricks - weak 2s in other suits, and preempts up to the four level - response to 2 clubs is 2 diamonds, showing <7 points, all other responses natural (this is now old-fashioned) - 15-17, 1NT, 21-22 2NT - Jacoby 2NT - double raise of major shows at least 4 and 10-13 HCP - double raise of minor is weaker but shows 5, usually - would like to relearn splinters - double of opponents NT bid is natural, and partner responds as if I’d bid NT - carding – hi-lo means doubleton, high is encouraging, low discouraging - there was a discard scheme I used to play, but forget its name - on your first discard in defense, you play a high card to indicate the higher of the two other suits, and a low card to indicate lower (2 other suits being, obviously, the suit that was led, and the suit you're discarding in) - unusual NT and Michaels - I’m not terribly familiar with new minor forcing, fourth suit forcing

Thanks, I didn't realize the ACBL tournaments were stratified. I'd forgotten about that. Haven't played tournaments in 10 years and am just getting back up to speed. Thanks, Keith

Hi A pick-up partner seemed to suggest that you can pick up master-points in regular BBO play (i.e. non tournament play). Is that so, and, if so, how? Also, I notice that there never seem to be tournaments restricted to level of ability (e.g. intermediate). Accordingly, intermediates have virtually no potential to pick up masterpoints when playing against all the experts you seem to see in tournaments. Or perhaps I'm just missing something. Thanks! Keith

Okay, thanks. But since I see it so often, I guess people must get banned often :lol: