Violating the Prime Directive

[uva72uva72]

My link

 

Match Points, ACBL robot individual

 

One of the first things I learned about competing in tournament bridge was that, when you preempt, you NEVER bid again unless your partner invites or forces you to do so. Perhaps that rule is relaxed in strong partnerships (although I watched one of our best pairs did so at the expense of going for 1700, thereby getting eliminated from the last Olympiad); but it's infuriating to have to worry that a robot, once it has pre-empted, will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Is there no prospect of having this issue addressed?

 

Note also the random robot acts of kindness by East at tricks 2, 6 and 7, insuring that I would make my hopeless contract no matter which black suit I played. I've reported this issue in a separate string (as I'm sure others have done), but I do wonder whether East was perhaps embarrassed into action by North's breach of discipline? I cannot construct a single hand where East needs to protect ♦ Qx at the expense of both the ♣ and ♠ suits. Even if I have ♠-♥AKQJ10x♦AKJxxx♣x (and West opened on ♠Kxx♥9xxx♦xxxx♣Ax), my ♦ ruff in dummy insured that West's top ♦, not East's Q, would determine whether the contract makes or fails.

[Antrax]

GIB doesn't have all those "when partner bids game out of the blue, he's not inviting your opinion" rules. So, your 4♥ bid was descriptive to it, showing a 20-count with good 6 or okay 7 hearts. Opposite that it figured you rate to make 6♥.

Just keep in mind you often can't "place the contract" when playing with GIB, since leaps often show extra strength. It's quite possible if you'd bid 3♥-3♠-4♥ you'd get to play there.

[1eyedjack]

There are two main reasons why a robot will bid its hand twice, and these include but are not limited to when it has already pre-empted (or for that matter made any other limit bid).

 

One is where the human grossly overstates his values (per GIB system) as per the OP of this thread.

 

The other is where it re-evaluates its offensive playing strength based on subsequent bids by opponents in which it places blind trust. For example it might initially treat xxx in a suit as a weak holding. But then when opponents strongly bid and support that suit, it places partner with a fitting shortage and some implied trump support of its own.

 

These gifts in the card play I think are particularly worrying. My perception is that what used to be a trickle is turning into a bit of a flood.

 

 

 

[steve2005]

Gibs card play is distressing. ok should pitch ♦ not black cards but playing Q♣ when dummy leads the 9 and holds the J. Any beginner knows to play the ten not the Queen.

 

Is Gib a beginner?

 

 

 

[Antrax]

"GIB is a savant" is the best way to think about it. It can execute a complex squeeze one hand and the next pitch an ace to let an unmakeable contract through. The kind of mistakes it made won't be made by most humans, so it's difficult to model its skill level.

It does perform better than the average BBO player.