iandayre Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 http://tinyurl.com/mgten7n At almost all tables the auction was the same through 3C. Most chose to ignore their good C fit, excellent controls and nice Kx of S to bid 3NT. Silly me, I chose the obvious systemic call of 3D, showing a forward going hand with 4+ Clubs and 2 Spades. GIB then bid 3H...A bid that sounds strength showing, but did get across the point that responder had 5314 shape. I had done enough and had Diamonds well stopped so I bid 3NT. GIB's 4S continuation is an insult. Did you think I wasn't paying attention partner? Only one other player cue bid over 3C, choosing 3H. Now, with a singleton D, GIB bid 3NT! Someone explain THAT one please. As it happens even 3NT usually goes down due to the poor lie of the pointed suits. Who did make 3NT? The one who jumped to 3NT directly over the transfer! And he misguessed the Clubs. But the defense gave him 3 Diamond tricks, while the rest of us were held to one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 again I am just not sure if pays to have these complicated auctions with the bots. Leo has posted his system for playing with the bots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 GIB then bid 3H...A bid that sounds strength showing, but did get across the point that responder had 5341 shape. I had done enough and had Diamonds well stopped so I bid 3NT. GIB's 4S continuation is an insult. Did you think I wasn't paying attention partner?It seems to me that North heard four bids from you which gave a thorough picture of your hand, probably did some simulations (which humans can't really do), and placed the contract in 4♠. Why would you pull it? Did you think he wasn't paying attention? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iandayre Posted January 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 16, 2015 It seems to me that North heard four bids from you which gave a thorough picture of your hand, probably did some simulations (which humans can't really do), and placed the contract in 4♠. Why would you pull it? Did you think he wasn't paying attention? That's one way of looking at it. Of course if you just give him AQJxx of S for all this bidding, 6C is quite a good spot. In my opinion it makes no sense to pull to 4S with the actual hand, so I am not going to play the robot for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iandayre Posted January 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 16, 2015 again I am just not sure if pays to have these complicated auctions with the bots. Leo has posted his system for playing with the bots. I am quite aware how successful Leo, kencohen, and some others are by opening wildly understrength and/or off shape no trump hands, refusing to respond to Stayman, and similar tactics. I don't criticize them in any way, but I have no interest in playing that sort of game. The only way I want to play is as close as possible to a real bridge club experience. I don't expect the bots to bid like national champs. I put in a fair amount of time on this board pointing out areas where improvement is needed and hoping it happens. BBO is the largest online bridge club in the world and I believe it should offer the best computerized bridge experience in the world - including state of the art competence for its Robot players. And of course it is the disasters that get talked about. If the bridge were that bad I would have given up long ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted January 16, 2015 Report Share Posted January 16, 2015 As far as the bots I am just surprised that they don't bid better much better but they do seem to bid and play better than 50% of acbl members...I would guess better than 60% today. I think a reasonable goal is by 2017 they bid and play better than 70% of acbl members. In 2021 better than 90% of acbl members------------ In any case you make clear you prefer the bots adjust to you today in 2015 rather than you adjust to the bots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olegru Posted January 16, 2015 Report Share Posted January 16, 2015 I think a reasonable goal is by 2017 they bid and play better than 70% of acbl members. In 2021 better than 90% of acbl members an by 2030 bots will bid better than all 5 acbl members :)Just kidding. ***For me the main problem with GIB bidding is following:As a person as soon as I reasonable described my cards I trust my partner and accept his decision.Seems like bots do not understand conception of trust. Every time (except when their bid dictated by system) their run simulation and make the final decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iandayre Posted January 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 16, 2015 (edited) As far as the bots I am just surprised that they don't bid better much better but they do seem to bid and play better than 50% of acbl members...I would guess better than 60% today. I think a reasonable goal is by 2017 they bid and play better than 70% of acbl members. In 2021 better than 90% of acbl members------------ In any case you make clear you prefer the bots adjust to you today in 2015 rather than you adjust to the bots. Just out of curiosity I went to the ACBL Website to look at overall members' masterpoint holdings. The median number of MP's for all members is about 200. 60% have under 400. 70% have under abour 550. Less than 7% are at the Gold LM level (2500 MP) or higher. Computer have the inherent advantage of never miscounting or forgetting what cards have or have not been played. In that regard they are world class experts - and that is an important bridge skill. Given that, and if you are correct that their overall skill is better than only 50 or 60 percent of players, where does that put their bidding skills? And the bots have trained and skilled full-time employees whose job it is to sharpen their playing ability. They purport to play a system that, when looking at its description, is quite adequate. Anyway, not to go on and on, my goal is to get BBO to invest more resources into improving the bots. I would think we could all get behind that idea. Edited January 18, 2015 by diana_eva closed quote Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnu Posted January 17, 2015 Report Share Posted January 17, 2015 Computer have the inherent advantage of never miscounting or forgetting what cards have or have not been played. In that regard they are world class experts - and that is an important bridge skill. Given that, and if you are correct that their overall skill is better than only 50 or 60 percent of players, where does that put their bidding skills? And the bots have trained and skilled full-time employees whose job it is to sharpen their playing ability. They purport to play a system that, when looking at its description, is quite adequate. Anyway, not to go on and on, my goal is to get BBO to invest more resources into improving the bots. I would think we could all get behind that idea. While the theory is that robots never miscount or forget what cards are played, we have all seen to many cases where "bad" simulations or just inexplicable blunders lead to horrific mistakes that should never happen if the robots had counted or remembered what cards had been played. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iandayre Posted January 18, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 18, 2015 John, I don't believe that the robots ever miscount or forget. They do make egregious errors, even late in the hand at times, but they are the result of the fact that they don't give each other signals. Nor do they understand signals given by human partners. I know this predates the ownership of GIB by BBO, but one must wonder how anyone ever believed that a viable bridge-playing program could be devised without defensive signaling ability. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted January 18, 2015 Report Share Posted January 18, 2015 John, I don't believe that the robots ever miscount or forget. They do make egregious errors, even late in the hand at times, but they are the result of the fact that they don't give each other signals. Nor do they understand signals given by human partners.But they do sometimes "forget" that a finesse was successful and then play for an honor to drop instead of repeating that finesse. I know this predates the ownership of GIB by BBO, but one must wonder how anyone ever believed that a viable bridge-playing program could be devised without defensive signaling ability.15 years ago, it was good enough to win a second consecutive World Computer Bridge Championship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1eyedjack Posted January 18, 2015 Report Share Posted January 18, 2015 15 years ago, it was good enough to win a second consecutive World Computer Bridge Championship.The opposition in which comprised, I presume, computers of a standard 15 years ago Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted January 18, 2015 Report Share Posted January 18, 2015 The opposition in which comprised, I presume, computers of a standard 15 years agoAgreed. I was responding to a post saying "one must wonder how anyone ever believed..." They believed they had a reasonable product because it was the best product available at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Tu Posted January 18, 2015 Report Share Posted January 18, 2015 But they do sometimes "forget" that a finesse was successful and then play for an honor to drop instead of repeating that finesse.This shouldn't happen with the advanced bot. But a known problem with the basic bot, as that bot doesn't really follow "plans" in quite the same way as a human or the advanced bot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iandayre Posted January 19, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 19, 2015 Agreed. I was responding to a post saying "one must wonder how anyone ever believed..." They believed they had a reasonable product because it was the best product available at the time. OK, a valid point. At the time expectations were different. Perhaps I should have said that one must wonder how BBO today believes they have a viable bridge playing program without defensive signaling abilities. From what I understand, more recently devised programs do have that ability. And I have noticed that GIB no longer even competes in the computer bridge championships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve2005 Posted January 19, 2015 Report Share Posted January 19, 2015 This shouldn't happen with the advanced bot. But a known problem with the basic bot, as that bot doesn't really follow "plans" in quite the same way as a human or the advanced bot. Playing Imps it is possible to not take a finesse that worked earlier. Possible that finesse doesn't work second time now your down, lol 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.