Deanrover Posted March 14, 2006 Report Share Posted March 14, 2006 In the new version I can't add any 'money' - so the only option is to play at the play money tables. Just checking this was intentional. I am ready and waiting to test it out now, if anyone is up for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uday Posted March 14, 2006 Report Share Posted March 14, 2006 Yes, intentional. Am poking at "settlement" code now. When that's done, i'll open up the real $ rooms (along with the add-real-$ function). Schedule: "any day now" (tho i recall saying that yest.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanrover Posted March 14, 2006 Report Share Posted March 14, 2006 You should make the time aspect more transparent. i played many hands without having a clue how much time I was allowed. Then I got a message which seemed to hint that you were allowed x seconds per move (where x = 30,60,90 when speed = slow, medium, fast). I also don't think this is the best way to implement a timing element - it should be x minutes allowed per board imo. Bridge decision's are not monotonous - some of them, typically at the beginning of a board, may require a couple of minutes thought - others are pretty much automatic. It would be nice if you could introduce a funky little 'timer' somewhere on the screen - this would make the situation much more clear (bear in mind that not everyone will understand the little text message that appears). Another thing - please enable GIB to claim! It uses this facility excellently in its original form, if you could allow it to do this on BBO, not only would it mean happy customers, but also more hands/hr = more $ to you! e.g. this hand just played [hv=d=n&v=a&n=sq8762h974dqt76c5&w=sj4hqt653dk5cakqt&e=sakt3hkj2da432c98&s=s95ha8dj98cj76432]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - Pass 1NT Pass 2♦ Pass 2♥ Pass 3♣ Pass 4♥ Pass 4NT Pass 5♣ Pass 6♥ Pass Pass Pass C4 CA C5 C8 H6 H4 HJ HA C6 CK H7 C9 S2 SA S5 S4 H2 H8 HQ H9 CQ S8 S3 C2 CT DT HK C3 D4 D8 DK D6 D5 D7 DA D9 SK S9 SJ S7 D3 DJ HT DQ H5 S6 D2 C7 H3 SQ ST CJ Really not necessary to play this one out. (OK OK, I only included this one to show off my lead, you got me.......) Other feedback - the move to have GIB take a couple of seconds minimum per move has been implemented excellently. It feels much more natural now, and the risk of UI is greatly diminished. Dean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr1303 Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 There are still a lot of bugs in GIB's bidding. We had this sequence the other day: 1D (1H) X P3S (4H) 5H P5S P P X Partner, the negative doubler and 5H bidder held: AKxxAKxxxxxxx 5H was booked for -1100 Similarly, the sequence 1NT P 6D P7NT all pass 1NT opener and opening leader were GIBs, and partner had AKQx of hearts to lead from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarlRitner Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 These might be bugs (outright errors) or they might just be undefined sequences (holes in the database). Defaulting GIB to "always make the book bid" can exacerbate this in some cases, since GIB cannot simulate its way out of the hole. In all honesty I'm not sure just what GIB does here so I could be way off the mark. There can be "subtle appearing" errors when looking through the database but these can manifest themselves in glaring ways, as you point out. It will be interesting to see if BBO money players are willing to dismiss this sort of mistake by rationalizing how it all evens out in the end. Cheers, CarlACBL Library Used Bridge Books Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 There are still a lot of bugs in GIB's bidding. We had this sequence the other day: 1D (1H) X P3S (4H) 5H P5S P P X Partner, the negative doubler and 5H bidder held: AKxxAKxxxxxxx 5H was booked for -1100 What is wrong with this sequence? 5H is a cue-bid in support of spades for me, and I would make the same bid. Arend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigi_BC84 Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 What is wrong with this sequence? 5H is a cue-bid in support of spades for me, and I would make the same bid. You would not penalty double instead? --Sigi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 What is wrong with this sequence? 5H is a cue-bid in support of spades for me, and I would make the same bid. You would not penalty double instead? --Sigi I think it is too likely we have slam. If the bidding so far makes sense, there is a lot of distribution on this deal, so 6S looks more profitable than 4H X (and a grand is possible). It depends on the vulnerability, of course. Arend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 There are still a lot of bugs in GIB's bidding. We had this sequence the other day: 1D (1H) X P3S (4H) 5H P5S P P X Partner, the negative doubler and 5H bidder held: AKxxAKxxxxxxx 5H was booked for -1100 What is wrong with this sequence? 5H is a cue-bid in support of spades for me, and I would make the same bid. Arend What about the strange 3♠ bid? 2♠ would be invitational, and 4♠ is the way to force to game. Is 3♠ really natural in this sequence? Are you sure the 1♥ bid wasn't actually 2♥? As for whether to double or explore for slam, it probably depends on the vulnerabilities. Also, I'd be worried about the ♣ suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uday Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 This isnt "meckwell in a box" in spite of its occasional aggression. Your opponent is the other human at the table. You will have an extra edge if you are better at managing GIB than he is. At speed-setting=fast, "book bidding" is turned on for GIB. At medium and slow, it is not. I'll publish all the settings we use once they're locked in. Gib claimed, when i re-ran the hand, that 2SThat bid shows: 3+ D; 4+ S; 15-17 points 3SThat bid shows: 3+ D; 11-21 HCP; biddable S; 12-22 points with book bidding, it always made a slam try, forcing to 5S. Without book bidding, it signed off at 4S when opener bid 2S and it made a slam try when opener bid 3S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uday Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 I have enabled real money bridge on production for those of you that are willing to actually lose or win money . - the money bridge admin screen inside MB allows you to deposit $ and look at account/hand history. When you deposit money, you receive slightly less than you deposited because of the cost of transfering money in via Credit Card/Paypal. You can send a check if you prefer (specify your username and that it is for money bridge) to BBO10550 Hope Mills DriveLas Vegas, NV USA 89135 - for now, email moneybridge@ for withdrawals and let us know how much to withdraw. What we'll do is refund your original CC if possible. If there is stuff left over, we'll send it to you via paypal or a check on a US bank (send us your address). I'll add a 'withdraw' option to the admin screen, and in a week or two this whole process will be automated. - incomplete hands are "settled" as follows: the hand is played out (starting where it left off) by 4 robots using the same speed/skill settings as the original table. We might add human oversight to this at some point. A hand waiting for settlement locks up 2500 points in your account until it is settled. Settlement is automated and if it runs smoothly, a typical hand will be settled within a couple of minutes. Hand history will only show a final score for now. I will eventually create a real hand record from the robot actions. - we'll keep an eye on all this. We're still in beta. if something goes awry with the settlement or anything else we'll correct it manually. That is, if a bug deposits 1,000,000 into your account, I probably won't let you keep it. - Fees have been reduced to 5 points per hand, with a 2-cent minimum. This is taken from the winner and the loser. No fees for passouts. - Uday and Gerardo won't be allowed to play Money Bridge except with people who understand that they're playing with people who could in theory cheat. I'd be happy to give it MB a whack with anyone who cares to try, and will trust me not to take advantage of my access to the system. Uday Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted February 18, 2010 Report Share Posted February 18, 2010 The random blind partner setup is open to exploitation by a group working together. Every now and again ( frequency depends on size of field, size of this cheating syndicate) the syndicate will be in a position to hose its victims. We explored variants of this on paper but we couldn't find anything satisfactory. sure, playing against 4 humans might be better. But some of the humans are going to cheat. It isnt going to work. It isnt enough to say 'buyer beware' when we know the innnocents will be abused. Maybe down the road i'll let a third party run 4-human games, with this 3rd party dealing with all the inevitable issues in exchange for a fair share of the fees but for now I don't want anything to do w/this...maybe we'll come up with a sensible 4-human variant in the future but not now.Personally, the only reason I would want to play money bridge on BBO would be to play with my friends and acquaintances. If BBO takes that ability away then there is no point, surely there are better things to do with one's money than put your faith in something as random as GIB. The fact that GIB's antics will even out in the long run is moot. Just like bad beats in poker, it is the individual dastardly things GIB does to a player that will weigh on the player's mind for all eternity, regardless of whether it ultimately evens out. Online bridge, even for money, should be a far more social setting than online poker; having GIBs thrust upon me would ruin the experience. If my three friends and I trust each other then that should be enough. I don't understand your point of view, Uday. Why would a clear disclaimer that the players are playing at their own risk not be enough? Perhaps there are legal or liability issues involved that I don't understand, but it seems like if online poker could allow players to take the risk of cheating then online bridge could allow it. One would think that the money players are a slightly more sophisticated group than the open room players, so if they are willing to put their money on the line then they understand the risks involved (including that of cheaters) and don't need BBO to play mommy. Give the 'innocents' you refer to a little credit, they need not be as naive as you think. If they are worried about cheaters then they will only play in set games with people they know. If they are not worried about cheaters then that is their risk to take. One of the money games I play in is held at a bridge club in Los Angeles next to their regular club game. Imagine a hypothetical situation: Instead of playing amongst ourselves, each of us in the money game has to partner a random player from the regular game, and they aren't playing for money but we are. Even if the randomness of all our partner's evens out in the long run, do you think any of us would want to keep playing? That is what forcing us to play with GIBs instead of people would do, and that's why unless I could play with only people at my own discretion I would hardly be interested in this service. Two more quick comments. One is that despite what may be perceived as a harsh tone, I still love BBO and everything you guys have done with it. The other is that since it seems to have been discussed to death I won't add much to the rake discussion, except to say that ten cents a hand is outrageously high at penny a point, in my opinion. (Allowing a table of four people would allow the rake to be significantly lower as well, no?) Lol, now all you do is play with gibs! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 18, 2010 Report Share Posted February 18, 2010 Oh there is no doubt I changed on this over time. Although part of it is that the gibs have hugely improved since then. And money bridge with all real players would still be way more fun. Seriously I could probably count on both hands the amount of people who spend more time on the forums than I do, and I never find myself searching around several-year-old threads. And I thought I was weird... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 18, 2010 Report Share Posted February 18, 2010 Btw I like your reply to that post of mine.Hi Josh, Welcome to the forums.♥ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted February 18, 2010 Report Share Posted February 18, 2010 Oh there is no doubt I changed on this over time. Although part of it is that the gibs have hugely improved since then. And money bridge with all real players would still be way more fun. Seriously I could probably count on both hands the amount of people who spend more time on the forums than I do, and I never find myself searching around several-year-old threads. And I thought I was weird... Haha just kidding man, I was curious what your first forum post ever was and then I thought it was funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanp Posted February 18, 2010 Report Share Posted February 18, 2010 In 2006 cherdano did not double 4H with AKxxx, I wonder what he would do now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 19, 2010 Report Share Posted February 19, 2010 This was really my first post? Go me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdanno Posted February 19, 2010 Report Share Posted February 19, 2010 In 2006 cherdano did not double 4H with AKxxx, I wonder what he would do now. He still wouldn't double as his GIB partner would pull! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.