What's going on?

[pilowsky]

WHAT'S YOUR CALL - take the poll.

[hv=pc=n&s=sj7432h6dk74ckj96&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=p1d?]133|200[/hv]

I was just playing a few hands in Prime against the robots after crashing in a daylong - again. When this hand came up.

 

Since I started playing Bridge, I've noticed a lot of people bidding a weak 2 with a (SH/minors) 52/42 or a 51/43 hand shape or the other way round for ♥. In addition to the regular 6 of a suit.

I've also noticed that the robots are happy to interfere Cappelletti-style with only 4 of a major on this type of hand shape.

So I thought I'd have a go myself. This style of preempting seems excellent for online Bridge since the player bidding does the alerting.

 

Anyway, here I'm playing at IMP's presumably against advanced GIB.

 

The following auction occurs and the robots make 6♦ because I misdefend.

 

So I saved the hand and moved to a teaching table in the Prime area to see if I could do better.

This time GIB bids the hand completely differently! Instead of the 4♣ bid East bids 4♥.

 

So, I move into the East seat and replicate the original bidding, and let GIB fight it out amongst itself. The result was not pretty.

Remember the scene in that Aliens film when two big aliens kill the little one to … well, you get the idea.

 

The people that didn't get in the way (or overcalled 1♠) allowed GIB to make its way happily to 3NT, 15 times. E.G.

 

As an aside, a question for BBO is: are the teaching table robots on Prime, not advanced robots? If not why not? Since this may explain the different result that I got with the hand belonging to smerriman in the other post. Or are they something else again.

 

: Marvin Gaye.

[Cyberyeti]

SO you got them into a hopeless contract and decided to chuck the winner and keep the loser at trick 12 having already mistakenly attacked clubs and gifted them a trick.

 

We might find the jump overcall, we also don't even need the 5th one at this vulnerability.

[akwoo]

Pilowsky - You need to keep track of the cards well enough to know that there are no more spades left at trick 12. All 12 other spades have been played. You should know that. If it's a one-off mistake, okay. Otherwise, stop trying to learn about bidding, conventions, any of that stuff. Just focus on counting all the cards. It will make a much bigger difference to your scores than anything else you could learn.

 

(Also, the lead of the J of clubs when you get in is terrible. What are you trying to do? Partner can't have the Ace of clubs; GiB isn't the best bidder but it's not that bad.)

 

Honestly - if I defended a hand that badly, I would be so mad at myself I'd chuck the computer out the window. (Okay - not really - but close.)

[pilowsky]

Pilowsky - You need to keep track of the cards well enough to know that there are no more spades left at trick 12. All 12 other spades have been played. You should know that. If it's a one-off mistake, okay. Otherwise, stop trying to learn about bidding, conventions, any of that stuff. Just focus on counting all the cards. It will make a much bigger difference to your scores than anything else you could learn.

 

(Also, the lead of the J of clubs when you get in is terrible. What are you trying to do? Partner can't have the Ace of clubs; GiB isn't the best bidder but it's not that bad.)

 

Honestly - if I defended a hand that badly, I would be so mad at myself I'd chuck the computer out the window. (Okay - not really - but close.)

 

Honestly, I'm not sure what sort of computer you have but I do know the feeling.

Anyway, the post is not so much about the hand - as you rightly observed it was entirely the computers fault, I'll buy another one immediately, - no the main point of the post was about the difference in GIB bidding in the different parts of the Prime area.

Actually, sometimes I bid quite well - sometimes I even manage to play reasonably OK - just not that often, unfortunately. Sometimes BBO even gives me a fraction of a masterpoint . I know right, how about that.

There's no point in posting those hands - I wouldn't learn anything from them!

 

Oh look, it just happened again...

[Huibertus]

The bidding of this hand by robot's is completely ridiculous.

Why on earth would you not pass 3NT, when you hold QTX in opponents suit and partner states he has stopped that suit. Makes no sense on either of the sequences. It's a balanced bare minimum, not worth a second bid even believing QTX does not help.

 

As for your remarks on 2♠, I'm fine with 2♠ on this had, it is certainly better then 1♠ as you are not advocating a constructive hand, opposite a passed hand, and partner should consider not to lead ♠ with AX or KX.

 

However, 2♠ is ONLY ok if the partnership understanding is that you will fully stretch bidding to the maximum preemptive level and THEREFORE partner will NEVER raise holding a hand like North. The agreement should also include the option to double a cue opponents bid to suggest NOT to lead your suit.

 

The idea being, get in as high as you dare and then stay out hoping they guess wrong. So the robot should not support but then I guess the robot is not aware of this partnership approach, hence my choice to pass.

[pilowsky]

Bidding shmidding. Why is it different in the two areas !!!!

[smerriman]

If you're playing with a basic robot, it will make exactly the same bid in the same situation.

 

If you're playing with an advanced robot, it will start with the basic robot's bid, then simulate a number of hands and see whether other bids would lead to a better final result. In a tournament situation, different tables will match the random seeds and ensure the robot runs the same simulations and comes up with the same bid. Anywhere else, like the situation your described, the simulated hands will differ, and therefore the outcome can differ every time the hand is plaeyd.

[hrothgar]

If you're playing with a basic robot, it will make exactly the same bid in the same situation.

 

If you're playing with an advanced robot, it will start with the basic robot's bid, then simulate a number of hands and see whether other bids would lead to a better final result. In a tournament situation, different tables will match the random seeds and ensure the robot runs the same simulations and comes up with the same bid. Anywhere else, like the situation your described, the simulated hands will differ, and therefore the outcome can differ every time the hand is plaeyd.

 

???

 

My understand is that both basic and advanced bots use simulations.

 

The difference is that advanced bots do more simulations and the have the seed synchronization feature that you describe.

 

Basic bots do NOT always make the same bid in the same situation

[smerriman]

???

 

My understand is that both basic and advanced bots use simulations.

 

The difference is that advanced bots do more simulations and the have the seed synchronization feature that you describe.

 

Basic bots do NOT always make the same bid in the same situation

No, basic bots never simulate during the auction. Both bots simulate during the play (advanced with a higher sample). That's why any bidding bugs are reported with basic bots to see what the 'book' bid is, and can be 100% replicated at a bidding table.

[Vampyr]

This style of preempting seems excellent for online Bridge since the player bidding does the alerting.[/size][/font]

 

What do you mean?

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=sj7432h6dk74ckj96&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=p1d?]133|200| Pilowsky "WHAT'S YOUR CALL - take the poll. I was just playing a few hands in Prime against the robots after crashing in a daylong - again. When this hand came up."

+++++++++++++++++++++++

I rank ...

1. Pass = NAT Poor suit that I probably don't want led.

2. 1♠ = NAT Mildly pre-emptive.

3. 2♠ = NAT Weak Foolhardy.[/hv] [hv=lin=st||pn|pilowsky,~~M2693oma,~~M321224e,~~M2548sdy|md|3SJ7432H6DK74CKJ96,SAKHAK754DJT93CQ7,S986HQJT92D65C854,SQT5H83DAQ82CAT32|sv|e|rh||ah|Board%209|mb|P|mb|1D|an|Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20!D;%2011-21%20HCP;%2012-22%20total%20points%20|mb|2S|an|Aggressive%20weak%20jump%20overcall%20--%206+%20!S;%204-9%20HCP|mb|3H|an|Free%20bid%20--%205+%20!H;%2013+%20total%20points%20|mb|3S|an|The%20Law:%209%20trump%20-%3E%203%20level%20--%202+%20!S;%2011-%20HCP;%204-12%20total%20points%20|mb|P|mb|P|mb|3N|an|5%20!H;%205-%20!S;%2014-21%20HCP;%20likely%20stop%20in%20!S%20|mb|P|mb|4C|an|4+%20!C;%204+%20!D;%2011-21%20HCP;%203-card%20!D;%2012-22%20total%20points%20|mb|P|mb|6D|an|4+%20!D;%205%20!H;%205-%20!S;%2021-%20HCP;%2020+%20total%20points;%20likely%20stop%20in%20!S%20|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|H6|pc|HA|pc|H2|pc|H3|pc|DJ|pc|D5|pc|DQ|pc|DK|pc|CJ|pc|CQ|pc|C4|pc|C2|pc|DT|pc|D6|pc|D2|pc|D4|pc|D3|pc|S6|pc|D8|pc|D7|pc|S5|pc|S3|pc|SA|pc|S8|pc|SK|pc|S9|pc|ST|pc|S4|pc|HK|pc|HQ|pc|H8|pc|S2|pc|C7|pc|C8|pc|CA|pc|C9|pc|SQ|pc|S7|pc|H7|pc|C5|pc|C3|pc|C6|pc|D9|pc|HJ|pc|H5|pc|H9|pc|DA|pc|CK|pc|CT|pc|SJ|pc|H4|pc|HT|]400|300| Pilowsky "Since I started playing Bridge, I've noticed a lot of people bidding a weak 2 with a (SH/minors) 52/42 or a 51/43 hand shape or the other way round for ♥. In addition to the regular 6 of a suit. I've also noticed that the robots are happy to interfere Cappelletti-style with only 4 of a major on this type of hand shape.So I thought I'd have a go myself. This style of preempting seems excellent for online Bridge since the player bidding does the alerting. Anyway, here I'm playing at IMP's presumably against advanced GIB. The following auction occurs and the robots make 6♦ because I misdefend."

+++++++++++++++++++++++

OK, It's a bidder's game :)

Thank you for bravely posting the play. Your defensive mistakes are instructive. We achieve better results when we take Akwoo's advice and emulate 2 of Gib's defensive skills.

1. Lead passively.

2. Count cards and HCP. [/hv][hv=lin=st||pn|pilowsky,~~M2262ek5,~~M426378t,~~M3149ex0|md|3SJ7432H6DK74CKJ96,SAKHAK754DJT93CQ7,S986HQJT92D65C854,SQT5H83DAQ82CAT32|sv|e|rh||ah|Board%209|mb|P|mb|1D|an|Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20!D;%2011-21%20HCP;%2012-22%20total%20points%20|mb|2S|an|Aggressive%20weak%20jump%20overcall%20--%206+%20!S;%204-9%20HCP|mb|3H|an|Free%20bid%20--%205+%20!H;%2013+%20total%20points%20|mb|3S|an|The%20Law:%209%20trump%20-%3E%203%20level%20--%202+%20!S;%2011-%20HCP;%204-12%20total%20points%20|mb|P|mb|P|mb|3N|an|5%20!H;%205-%20!S;%2014-21%20HCP;%20likely%20stop%20in%20!S%20|mb|P|mb|4H|an|3+%20!D;%203+%20!H;%2011-21%20HCP;%2012-22%20total%20points%20|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|S6|pc|S5|pc|S2|pc|SA|pc|HA|pc|H2|pc|H8|pc|H6|pc|HK|pc|HQ|pc|H3|pc|S3|pc|DJ|pc|D5|pc|D2|pc|DK|pc|S4|pc|SK|pc|S8|pc|ST|pc|H7|pc|H9|pc|C2|pc|D7|pc|HJ|pc|C3|pc|D4|pc|H4|pc|C5|pc|CA|pc|C6|pc|C7|pc|SQ|pc|S7|pc|CQ|pc|S9|pc|D8|pc|SJ|pc|D3|pc|D6|pc|DA|pc|C9|pc|D9|pc|C8|pc|CT|pc|CJ|pc|H5|pc|C4|pc|DT|pc|HT|pc|DQ|pc|CK|]400|300| Pilowsky " So I saved the hand and moved to a teaching table in the Prime area to see if I could do better. This time GIB bids the hand completely differently! Instead of the 4♣ bid East bids 4♥."

+++++++++++++++++++++++

Agree with Hubertus: The Robot's bidding is hard to understand. Even with simulations, Gib's judgement is poor :(

[/hv][hv=lin=st||pn|~~M7610whz,~~M2262ek5,~~M426378t,~~M3149ex0|md|3SJ7432H6DK74CKJ96,SAKHAK754DJT93CQ7,S986HQJT92D65C854,SQT5H83DAQ82CAT32|sv|e|rh||ah|Board%209|mb|P|mb|1D|an|Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20!D;%2011-21%20HCP;%2012-22%20total%20points|mb|2S|an|Aggressive%20weak%20jump%20overcall%20--%206+%20!S;%204-9%20HCP|mb|3H|an|Free%20bid%20--%205+%20!H;%2013+%20total%20points%20|mb|3S|an|The%20Law:%209%20trump%20-%3E%203%20level%20--%202+%20!S;%2011-%20HCP;%204-12%20total%20points%20|mb|P|mb|P|mb|3N|an|5%20!H;%205-%20!S;%2014-21%20HCP;%20likely%20stop%20in%20!S%20|mb|P|mb|4C|an|4+%20!C;%204+%20!D;%2011-21%20HCP;%203-card%20!D;%2012-22%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|6D|an|4+%20!D;%205%20!H;%205-%20!S;%2021-%20HCP;%2020+%20total%20points;%20likely%20stop%20in%20!S%20|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|H6|pc|HA|pc|H2|pc|H3|pc|D3|pc|D5|pc|D8|pc|DK|pc|D4|pc|DJ|pc|D6|pc|D2|pc|DT|pc|S6|pc|DA|pc|D7|pc|S5|pc|S2|pc|SA|pc|S8|pc|SK|pc|S9|pc|ST|pc|SJ|pc|HK|pc|HQ|pc|H8|pc|S7|pc|C7|pc|C4|pc|CT|pc|CJ|pc|CK|pc|CQ|pc|C8|pc|CA|pc|SQ|pc|S3|pc|H7|pc|C5|pc|C2|pc|C9|pc|D9|pc|HJ|pc|H5|pc|H9|pc|DQ|pc|S4|pc|C3|pc|C6|pc|H4|pc|HT|]400|300| Pilowky "So, I move into the East seat and replicate the original bidding, and let GIB fight it out amongst itself. The result was not pretty. Remember the scene in that Aliens film when two big aliens kill the little one to … well, you get the idea.

The people that didn't get in the way (or overcalled 1♠) allowed GIB to make its way happily to 3NT, 15 times.

As an aside, a question for BBO is: are the teaching table robots on Prime, not advanced robots? If not why not? Since this may explain the different result that I got with the hand belonging to smerriman in the other post. Or are they something else again. What's going on: Marvin Gaye? "

+++++++++++++++++++++++

Great stuff :)

Perhaps, it makes sense to make unsound jump-overcalls against GIBs, since it seems to confuse them.

Smerriman's revelations about the different kinds of Robot are instructive and useful. :)[/hv]

[pilowsky]

What do you mean?

 

What I mean is that normally when you sit a table with a pick-up partner and agree to play 2/1 or SAYC or whatever, it generally includes some sort of weak 2♠ ♥.

My original experience of playing in clubs was that my partner had to alert these calls as - say 6+ and less than an opening hand.

 

In the online environment, the person making the bid does the alerting, so as long as I'm making a call that isn't going to damage my partner - like this one - then why not?

 

The shape of the bid reminded me of the Cappelletti bids that GIB makes - except that GIB also does it with 4/5 major/minor,

[hrothgar]

No, basic bots never simulate during the auction. Both bots simulate during the play (advanced with a higher sample). That's why any bidding bugs are reported with basic bots to see what the 'book' bid is, and can be 100% replicated at a bidding table.

 

Thanks

 

I wasn't aware of this

[msjennifer]

ABSTAIN.For obvious reasons.

[Vampyr]

What I mean is that normally when you sit a table with a pick-up partner and agree to play 2/1 or SAYC or whatever, it generally includes some sort of weak 2♠ ♥.

My original experience of playing in clubs was that my partner had to alert these calls as - say 6+ and less than an opening hand.

 

In the online environment, the person making the bid does the alerting, so as long as I'm making a call that isn't going to damage my partner - like this one - then why not?

With a pickup partner it is different and anything goes.

 

The shape of the bid reminded me of the Cappelletti bids that GIB makes - except that GIB also does it with 4/5 major/minor,

 

And 4/9.

[burgerme]

no wonder i despair for bridge :blink:

[pilowsky]

 

 

And 4/9.

 

Well, some people can get by with just 9 cards, but for you, sure 13 .

[pigpenz]

you have the boss suit and you really dont want a spade lead from partner, you can always balance later if possible.

[pigpenz]

there are aleast 4 different types of bots I believe....the old bbb.exe allows you to allow the amount thinking time that Gib TAKES. The other GIBs depend on wether they are free or how much you pay for....the weekly or monthly rental bots are not as advanced as the tournament bots. Bidding room bots I am not aware of what their level is but what is interesting in the bidding room you can change your bid and see what happens with GIBs on the same hand

[pilowsky]

there are aleast 4 different types of bots I believe....the old bbb.exe allows you to allow the amount thinking time that Gib TAKES. The other GIBs depend on wether they are free or how much you pay for....the weekly or monthly rental bots are not as advanced as the tournament bots. Bidding room bots I am not aware of what their level is but what is interesting in the bidding room you can change your bid and see what happens with GIBs on the same hand

 

Cool - I haven't heard the term .exe since about 1987. I suppose that's when 'app' arrived and TSR.

 

So then yesterday, I get a hand with these cards South: ♠KJ973 ♥KQ8 ♦K7 ♣A53

The first time I put it on the Teaching table this is what happens: https://tinyurl.com/yx9k9x73

Every other time (I tried "at least" 5 more times with a 30-second pause between one try and a break of a different hand between the last try and this is the result: https://tinyurl.com/y5wzgy62

Guess what happened in the online tournament? GIB does something completely different and I got to play the hand as South: https://tinyurl.com/y3xwo9hr

So, my question is this. Is GIB changing its system card randomly? I don't mind GIB changing the order in which it plays it's cards randomly, but the bidding?

[thepossum]

If you're playing with a basic robot, it will make exactly the same bid in the same situation.

 

If you're playing with an advanced robot, it will start with the basic robot's bid, then simulate a number of hands and see whether other bids would lead to a better final result. In a tournament situation, different tables will match the random seeds and ensure the robot runs the same simulations and comes up with the same bid. Anywhere else, like the situation your described, the simulated hands will differ, and therefore the outcome can differ every time the hand is plaeyd.

 

Just a thought. In a tournament situation in order to save time rather than running the exact same simulation with the same seed each time, just run it once and save the result to be used elsewhere :)

 

I was going to start another topic somewhere but this seems a relevant thread. I'm weighing up the pros and cons, investment costs versus robot quality benefits between a monthly investment in Prime and an occasional weekly purchase of a basic Bot. I know I asked earlier and was told there wasnt really that much difference most of the time, except for unning mroe simulations. I have been meaning to put some of my more interesting basic bot auctions through the advanced bot bidding machine as a test :)

 

Some logic that would be good in an advanced bot would be different defensive approaches. The bidding doesnt go awry too often

[smerriman]

Just a thought. In a tournament situation in order to save time rather than running the exact same simulation with the same seed each time, just run it once and save the result to be used elsewhere :)

To be honest, that would be far more complex. The point of having the same seed is that if everything is equal going in, then everything is equal going out. If you try to change the behaviour from the first time it runs to later times, not only do you have to save a lot more information, but it would also mess everything up from that point forward, since the random number generator will be in a different state for later simulations that you haven't saved.