Acol Bidding with Robot Partner...

[Deblk]

Hiya...is it possible to be able to play standard Acol with robot as my partner?

 

Ciao for now :)

[1eyedjack]

No

[Deblk]

No

 

Shame...ok, ty

 

Ciao

[barmar]

Just cleaning up the problems with the existing bidding rules is close to a full time job. Writing a new bidding system would be an enormous job, especially if it's a system he's not really familiar with (I don't think anyone on the BBO staff has played ACOL).

 

If we wanted to do this, we'd probably have to hire a new programmer just for the project. It would have to be someone with both expertise in ACOL bidding, as well as enough programming experience to be able to learn the arcane language used to code GIB bidding rules. I suspect it would take him at least a year to get up to speed on the software and code all the rules.

[mink]

Is there really a language used for telling GIB how to bid? Is this a language also used elsewhere or something Matthew Ginsberg invented solely for this purpose? Up to now I always thought that GIB bidding was hard-coded, and it therefore it is not possible to implement alternate biddings systems. If all of it's bidding is coded in some bidding-system-definition-language, however, I wonder why it is so difficult create the definition for another bidding system, especially another natural bidding system, where it is possible just to change the 2/1 stuff, as there are basic principles common to all natural bidding systems.

 

And if it is still difficult with the language, why can commercial bridge playing programs play several systems and a lot of conventions, even such definable by the user?

 

Karl

[barmar]

The language was adapted from software called Meadowlark Bridge.

 

The problem is that it's not written in terms of "basic principles". It's thousands of individual rules based on pattern matching. The inputs are the auction so far and a string that represents what each player has shown about their hands, the outputs are the bid to make and what it shows about the bidder's hand. I'll show an example:

 

2 .. ~SYS(INVERTED)~

3 94X 3(#b&[CD]) P~.<10~:M~.>4~: D[5-9]#b&&:C..[0-3][0-3] *1206 :M5:p9:D5b:d3H3S

3 94X 2(#b&[CD])@RESP_INVRTD P~.>9~&&: D+[4-9]#b&&:C..[0-3][0-3] *2241 :P10:D4b:d3H3S:F~2N~

 

These are in the section of the bidding rules after the auction has started 1minor (Pass). The first line says "If we're playing inverted minors, try using the next two rules". In those rules, #b represents the suit that partner bid.

 

In the second line 3(#b&[CD]) = bid 3 of partner's suit if it's clubs or diamonds. The next column is the criteria to decide whether this rule applies: P~.<10 = less than 10 total points, M~.>4 = more than 4 HCP), D[5-9]#b = 5-9 cards in partner's suit, C..[0-3][0-3] = 0-3 cards in each major. *1206 is a reference to a table of bid meanings, in this case "Weak". The last part of the line is what the bid shows: M5 = at least 5 HCP, p9 = at most 9 total points, D5b = at least 5 cards in suit #b, d3H3S = at most 3 hearts and 3 spades.

 

The third line is similar, but describes the 2minor strong raise. @RESP_INVRTD means to follow the rules at that label to get the meaning of followup bids.

 

This is a particularly simple rule. Rules can do math, so they can say things like "If my length in suit X + what partner has shown is at least 8, set that as the presumed trump suit", and then later rules can say "If if our combined points are enough to bid at level Y, bid YX". They can also use math in what the bid shows; e.g. a rule that says to bid 3NT might say that it shows 25 minus how many points partner has promised. There are also hundreds of macros that combine various criteria, with names of varying levels of crypticness: NTYPE = traditional NT shape, NMTYPE = NT shape allowing a 5-card major, NTYPE2 = NT shape allowing 2 doubletons without a 5-card major.

 

What makes the whole thing very complicated is that a hand and bidding sequence can match many different rules. The rules all have priorities (94 in the above example), and the rule with the highest priority wins. While many of the individual rules in 2/1 and ACOL may be similar, the priorities will often be different. Changing the system from 5-card majors to 4-card majors will have a huge impact here. Going through thousands of rules and figuring out which ones should be reordered is very difficult. And there's a ripple effect -- changing the priority of one rule means you have to adjust the priorities of all other rules that should be lower or higher. This is where many of the subtle bugs in the existing rules occur.

[el mister]

 

And if it is still difficult with the language, why can commercial bridge playing programs play several systems and a lot of conventions, even such definable by the user?

 

Karl

What is the bidding standard like for these programs? I recently played a bridge app (from another place) on my phone, had a really nice playing interface - unfortunately the robot bidding is a bag o' shite, rendering the app useless {also featured acol bidding}. Not having played with robots before, I was wondering if this was a problem particular to the app - ie their bidding programs are poor. Or whether robot bridge programs are generally like this across the board.

 

Actually the bidding in question was not completely terrible, which made it more frustrating. There was a framework there which made you want to stick with it, but high level bids and doubles would just cripple you. I guess the idea is to learn how the robot bids and accommodate that?

[barmar]

About 90% of the time, the bidding is better than an average club player. But occasionally it does some really crazy things.

 

We have two types of robots, and their quirks are different. "Basic" robots bid just according to the bidding rules; this means they don't make as many strange bids, but it also means they don't make as many smart bids based on judgement about distribution (because putting all the distribution combinations into rules is difficult). "Advanced" robots use the rules as a first step, but they then use simulations to make deviations from the rules (except when the rules prohibit it, like answering Stayman or Blackwood), which gives them a kind of judgement. The "crazy" bids tend to come from this, which makes it hard to prevent them.

 

Basic robots are the robots you get when you rent for $1/week, play with robots for free on the 1st of every month, and play in the solitaire games. Advanced robots are used in robot tournaments and when you rent for $1/day.