Does GIB at least keep count?

[pescetom]

I don't often play with GIB because I don't like the system and the inconsistencies, but I did not expect it was capable of this.

 

See trick 7 of this hand

 

I understand that GIB is not artificial intelligence and that "play high when in doubt" was below the dignity of Ginsberg, but surely it should at least keep count in the long suit it hesitantly bid?

[smerriman]

This is typical GIB logic. Given it defends double dummy, it "cannot hurt" to play low, since on the next trick you "know" to put him in with the club ace. It can't distinguish playing low from high.

[pescetom]

Thanks :)

Maybe I should have envisioned him with the ♣A, instead of asking what the heck he was doing.

If we are forced to play together again I will take note.

I assume he is not capable of paying the beer.

[johnu]

I don't often play with GIB because I don't like the system and the inconsistencies, but I did not expect it was capable of this.

 

See trick 7 of this hand

 

I understand that GIB is not artificial intelligence and that "play high when in doubt" was below the dignity of Ginsberg, but surely it should at least keep count in the long suit it hesitantly bid?

 

Good defense by GIB North to hold on to the ♣A. A lesser bot might have pitched it and allowed a couple of overtricks.

[steve2005]

It might have help if GIB used some signaling.

Playing the 9 and then the 2 of ♣ you might be able to get the hint.

[sfi]

I don't often play with GIB because I don't like the system and the inconsistencies, but I did not expect it was capable of this.

I haven’t looked at the hand yet, but your expectations are clearly wrong. It’s definitely capable of almost any atrocity, including 0% lines on defence when a 100% line was available - on one discard. Time to start actively lowering those expectations. 😀