Money Bridge Tournaments in Robot World unfair?

[everbright]

Hi all,

 

I'm new to BBO, and have some question about the Money Bridge Tournaments in Robot World.

 

Does anyone know if everyone who participates plays the same hands and the same side?

I'm asking because I joined one of the tournaments and got a first hand where I was defending against a slam which was rather flat. There were people who finished the hand before me, and they got 980!

 

If it's a different hand, that seemed rather unfair, if you ask me.

If it's the same hand, it seems like these other players were sitting in the opposite seats instead, coz there is no way my side had a slam game, looking at my miserable points and 4-3-3-3 distribution, short of really gross overbidding by the player, and mis-play by the robots.

 

Also, seems like the robots don't quite understand how to respond properly to 2C openings, coz there were a few hands that the bidding went really wierd?

 

Anyone has any experiences with this as well, or what's going on here?

[uday]

There are currently three forms of the robot game.

 

They have this in common:

 

- One human per table, always sitting south

- 3 robots per table, sitting W,N,E

- randomly dealt hands

- different hands at each table

- scoring is total points

- tournament has a time limit ( currently 25 minutes )

- player can see current standings at any moment

- player can click Director! Withdraw at any time

- Hand records not visible in the 'myhands" archive

- Bots occasionally get jammed or broken ( auto refund, still eligible to win )

 

Having said that, here are the 3 forms we currently use

 

 

1. Free Money Bridge Tournament

Twice an hour. No card fee. No prizes. No masterpoints. Open to all. Each player restricted to one free tournament per day ( to allow others a chance to play ).

 

 

2. Robot Race

Four times an hour. 25 cent card fee. No prizes. Masterpoints. Open to all. The hand with the greatest HCP count (using the 4321 scale) always goes to the human.

 

3. Money Bridge Tournament

Every 9 minutes. Masterpoints. $1 card fee. 80 cents of that returned in the prize pool. Prizes distributed at end of tourney. Approx 25-30% of the players win something. A player who withdraws is still eligible to win, assuming his score stands up.

 

 

Hope that helped clear up the differences.

 

The oddities of the bots are a whole different subject and I could go on for a week on that topic. Suffice it to say here that the same bots are at every table, and the playing field is level in that regard.

 

Uday

[barmar]

Yes, it seems unfair that you're not playing the same hands as everyone else. But in the long run things should average out -- sometimes you'll get the slam hands that others don't.

 

It's no more unfair than rubber bridge. If the opponents keep getting the cards, and they don't overbid, they'll probably win the rubber. If you don't like luck being this much of a factor you should play duplicate bridge, not money bridge.

[fred]

The reason everyone plays different hands in our Money Bridge Tournaments is because, if these were duplicate tournaments, then people could cheat (2 or more people at different tables could collude).

 

Yes it can be frustrating when you are dealt bad hands in MBTs, but as barmar points out this will even out in the long run.

 

Our recent change to Robot Race in which the human is always dealt the best hand at the table greatly reduces the "luck of the draw" aspect of these tournaments. If the response from our Robot Race players continues to be favorable, we might try the same thing in at least some of Money Bridge Tournaments as well.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[helene_t]

Our recent change to Robot Race in which the human is always dealt the best hand at the table

Oh I was about to post a question if robot race was somehow biased towards giving the human better cards, I noticed I (as well as the field) score better at RR than at MB.

 

So this means that if I am dealt 10 HCPs I have a lot of info about the distribution of honors B)

[barmar]

So this means that if I am dealt 10 HCPs I have a lot of info about the distribution of honors :)

True, but the same thing could happen at other tables, and eventually things will even out. It's fair as long as everyone has been informed of the conditions.

 

The thing about this "eventually" part is that you need to play MBT or RR a lot for your skill to have more influence than bad luck.

[McBruce]

Gotta say, I do enjoy these MBT games quite a bit. Really good addition. It is reintroducing this duplicate player to the tactics of total points, plus adding a few new wrinkles:

 

--if you pick up a 2=1=5=5 14 count with 5 minutes left and it goes pass pass pass to you, why open? You'll just be wasting 2-4 minutes playing a hand that will likely be a small plus at best. Pass it out and take a chance on the next one.

 

--if LHbot and RHbot bid to a grand and you are on the leaderboard with less than ten minutes left, the (legal) option of playing eleven tricks and then stopping if it's going to make is enticing. In fact, you may as well double! (If you play the 12th trick, the system will play trick 13 for you and your score will plummet.)

 

--making GIBs system available during the auction through clicking is useful and helps to eliminate the advantage that experienced 2/1 players may have.

 

 

My inclination would be NOT to add the 'human has best HCP hand' to the MBT. I don't like the idea of knowing that no player has more points than I do, especially if I am dealt a middling hand.

 

Perhaps it would be OK in a somewhat disguised form: set up a virtual deck with four of each ace, three of each king, two of each queen, and one of each jack, ten and nine; pick a card at random and give the human player the hand with that card. Now you would often, but not always, get the best hand at the table.

[matmat]

--if LHbot and RHbot bid to a grand and you are on the leaderboard with less than ten minutes left, the (legal) option of playing eleven tricks and then stopping if it's going to make is enticing. In fact, you may as well double! (If you play the 12th trick, the system will play trick 13 for you and your score will plummet.)

I gotta say, this sounds awfully fishy to me.

[Guest Jlall]

--if LHbot and RHbot bid to a grand and you are on the leaderboard with less than ten minutes left, the (legal) option of playing eleven tricks and then stopping if it's going to make is enticing.  In fact, you may as well double!  (If you play the 12th trick, the system will play trick 13 for you and your score will plummet.)

I gotta say, this sounds awfully fishy to me.

Why? It's just part of the strategy involved in playing these.

[helene_t]

--if LHbot and RHbot bid to a grand and you are on the leaderboard with less than ten minutes left, the (legal) option of playing eleven tricks and then stopping if it's going to make is enticing.  In fact, you may as well double!  (If you play the 12th trick, the system will play trick 13 for you and your score will plummet.)

I gotta say, this sounds awfully fishy to me.

I was wondering if this tactic is considered ethical. I suppose it's not against the rules and I suppose active ethics is not something one owes robots :)

 

Then again, I agree with Matmat's sentiments.

[McBruce]

Y'all realize that there are any number of matchpoint tactics that rubber bridge players would find insane, right? Different forms of bridge are always going to have different tactics. In this case, the tournament rules specifically state that running out the clock is completely legal. In fact, it is often a point of strategy: with 20 minutes left and from a position off the leader board, you would let the grand make and then shoot for big scores the rest of the way, because you're not going to win with the score you have.

[Guest Jlall]

--if LHbot and RHbot bid to a grand and you are on the leaderboard with less than ten minutes left, the (legal) option of playing eleven tricks and then stopping if it's going to make is enticing.  In fact, you may as well double!  (If you play the 12th trick, the system will play trick 13 for you and your score will plummet.)

I gotta say, this sounds awfully fishy to me.

I was wondering if this tactic is considered ethical. I suppose it's not against the rules and I suppose active ethics is not something one owes robots :)

 

Then again, I agree with Matmat's sentiments.

I don't consider it any less ethical than swinging when you are losing, or avoiding going for numbers when you're winning by a lot. The biggest factor of these things is figuring out your best chance to win and/or not lose towards the end given the amount of time left and how close your other competitors are to you.

[pigpenz]

just figuring out GIB is a tactic in itself.

If you bid a grand on board one and make you could run out the clock from there.

Just part of the game.

 

12 board imp games, if minus 30 with 3 to go do you just play normal bridge or try to go plus for event? I try to win, my partner said youshould just enjoy the jewel in each little hand :) OK but you wont win the event!

[McBruce]

+1520 on Board 1 (all non-vul) will get likely you in the money, but probably won't win.

 

Actually, I suppose it might be a good rule that you have to play at least four hands, once through the vulnerability cycle.

[barmar]

--if LHbot and RHbot bid to a grand and you are on the leaderboard with less than ten minutes left, the (legal) option of playing eleven tricks and then stopping if it's going to make is enticing.  In fact, you may as well double!  (If you play the 12th trick, the system will play trick 13 for you and your score will plummet.)

I gotta say, this sounds awfully fishy to me.

I was wondering if this tactic is considered ethical. I suppose it's not against the rules and I suppose active ethics is not something one owes robots :)

 

Then again, I agree with Matmat's sentiments.

I think the tactic of waiting out the clock is specifically mentioned in the online help file.

 

I finally won a big MBT last week. Our side had to make 3 slams to do it. I find them fun, but they can also be extremely frustrating. I played in another MBT and went down in flames, because we bid a number of reasonable games and they all ran into horrible splits (not to mention one of those auctions where GIB loses its mind and its bids bear no resemblance to what the pop-ups say).

[McBruce]

I have to mention that since I first posted on this topic I am on a bit of a losing streak... :)

[Trysalot]

Well I just played the new $5.00 MBT twice and won't be playing it much unless BBO management changes the spread of the prizes the way it did recently in the $1.00 MBTs. Of course in that one the entry limit was expanded to (I think) 40 players and the number of placements in a game depends on the total entry where this new game is limited to 15 players. But it seems to me not fair to so heavily weight 1st place prize money in the $5.00 MBT and have only 4 placements with the 15 player limit when the entry cost is that expensive. If it gets changed to spread the prize money to just under 50% of the field, i.e. take it to 5th and 6th placements, then I will play it more often than I am planning to do right now.

[fred]

Well I just played the new $5.00 MBT twice and won't be playing it much unless BBO management changes the spread of the prizes the way it did recently in the $1.00 MBTs. Of course in that one the entry limit was expanded to (I think) 40 players and the number of placements in a game depends on the total entry where this new game is limited to 15 players. But it seems to me not fair to so heavily weight 1st place prize money in the $5.00 MBT and have only 4 placements with the 15 player limit when the entry cost is that expensive. If it gets changed to spread the prize money to just under 50% of the field, i.e. take it to 5th and 6th placements, then I will play it more often than I am planning to do right now.

I can't make any promises, but it is likely that the pay scheme will be altered to be in line with those of the $1 tournaments starting tomorrow. If not tomorrow, you will probably have to wait until early next week.

 

It will happen for sure - it is just a matter of when (and when is just a matter of when Uday and Gerardo get a chance to do to the necessary work).

 

Probably you realize this already, but for those readers who do not, the 2 pay schemes pay exactly the same % of the total $s collected to the field - the only difference is how this money is distributed among the leaders. The $1 scheme has the advantage of paying more players *something*, but has the disadvantage of offering less of a reward to the very highest finishers.

 

So to call either scheme "unfair" is a bit unfair :)

 

It does seem to be the case that most of our MBT regulars, like you, prefer the pay scheme in place in the $1 MBTs.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[Guest Jlall]

Any chance the cut BBO takes will be smaller for the higher buy in tournaments? I still think 20 % is a ton and it seems like at some point with higher buy ins the percent BBO is taking should lessen.

[fred]

Any chance the cut BBO takes will be smaller for the higher buy in tournaments? I still think 20 % is a ton and it seems like at some point with higher buy ins the percent BBO is taking should lessen.

I hadn't really thought about this, but my initial reaction to your suggestion is "not unreasonable".

 

But there won't be any such changes for at least a couple of weeks because one of our partners who has been the driving force behind MBT and RR changes is on vacation. I would not feel comfortable about making such a change until after he gets back and after Uday and I get a chance to discuss with him.

 

We will discuss with him - thanks for the suggestion.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[Guest Jlall]

Thanks for considering my suggestion, just a point I'd like to add that you may or may not find relevant is that for poker tournaments all the major sites have about 10 % rake to begin with for their low stakes tournaments and it becomes less and less with higher stakes (for instance, on poker stars, 10+1, 100+9, 200+15, 300+20, 500+30, 5000+200). So if you draw any analogy with the two then there is precedent for decreasing the % of the rake, but it does start at much higher stakes in poker.

[Trysalot]

So to call either scheme "unfair" is a bit unfair :)

I agree the word "unfair" was not the correct one to use but I was unable at the time to come up with anything better to use.

 

How about this? People (including me) who budget a certain amount a day to lose in money bridge tournaments would probably find it more attractive to play the $5.00 an entry games if they have a chance to recoup even $1.00 or $2.00 for a lower level placement such as 5th or 6th and win a little less if lucky enough to be 1st Place or 2nd Place. :)

 

Thanks, Fred, for saying the prize scheme will be looked at soon and may be structured like the $1.00 tourneys are now.

[fred]

So to call either scheme "unfair" is a bit unfair :)

I agree the word "unfair" was not the correct one to use but I was unable at the time to come up with anything better to use.

 

How about this? People (including me) who budget a certain amount a day to lose in money bridge tournaments would probably find it more attractive to play the $5.00 an entry games if they have a chance to recoup even $1.00 or $2.00 for a lower level placement such as 5th or 6th and win a little less if lucky enough to be 1st Place or 2nd Place. :)

 

Thanks, Fred, for saying the prize scheme will be looked at soon and may be structured like the $1.00 tourneys are now.

The new prize scheme is in place now.

 

You will now win exactly 5 times as much money in a $5 MBT as you would by finishing the same place in a $1 MBT with the same number of tables.

 

You won't see any prizes less than $5 in these tournaments because we have a general rule that the "last place" prize is never less than the entry fee. At some point we might revisit this policy for the $5 tournaments, but that probably won't be happening for at least a few more weeks.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[Trysalot]

Thank you so much, Fred, for this information. I will definitely be playing in both the $5.00 and the $1.00 MBTs along with playing money bridge tables and ACBL tourneys. All I have to do now is figure out which ACBL tourneys I want to give up in order to play the $5.00 MBTs which start at the same time as the Speedballs. I was doing pretty well at maneuvering the cafeteria line to taste everything every evening and now you've not only added another item to the menu but you're making me choose between it and something else. I just LOVE having to make these decisions. FUN! It's what BBO is all about. THANK YOU.

[Trysalot]

Oh, WOW! I posted in here BEFORE going online to play bridge. Just found out I don't have to choose between $5 MBT and ACBL tourney after all because now the new MBT will be on the half hour as well as the hour. That's terrific! I can play a $5.00 MBT and get out of it in time for the next Speedball. Thank you. Thank you. :D

 

And, yes, I noticed the entry limit has been raised to 49. What fun! :lol: