Why I will no longer play money bridge Just too much
#21
Posted 2007-May-31, 19:50
1♥ 2♦ 2♠ P
3♠ P--- 4♠ P
P
So, I'm about to X, and then I notice says takeout, shows 4+ clubs!!!!
How can it possibly even imagine that could be takeout?
#22
Posted 2007-June-01, 04:26
jtfanclub, on Jun 1 2007, 02:50 AM, said:
Actually, GIB doesn't do any "imagining" whatsoever.
-- Bertrand Russell
#23
Posted 2007-June-01, 07:44
few days ago i was vul and got something like this:
AJXXX
AKJ
X
AKXX
I opened 1S gibs give me 2H GF, i bid 3H and it then bid 3S, i decided to ask for aces checked that it asks in ♠ and gib shows 3 aces by 5C, i asks for Q of ♠ and gib bid 5NT showing the Q. i then needed the Q of ♥ for 7 else i want to stay in 6, wasnt sure how to bid it, the FD say 6♣/6♦/6♥ are cue bids, i decided to bid 6♣ and hope he bids 6♥ but gib had a different idea, it passed, with a singlton ♣ and fit in both other majors, when the FD say its a cue bid.
1♠ - 2♥
3♥ - 3♠
4NT - 5♣
5♦ - 5NT
6♣ - PASS !!!
#24
Posted 2007-June-01, 08:40
Flame, on Jun 1 2007, 02:44 PM, said:
Repeat after me: "GIB is a computer program".
It is not capable of making up bidding agreements on the fly. It will not be able to figure out that you want it to bid 6♥ if it has the Queen. If you bid as if it could figure that sort of thing out, you deserve your bad results.
-- Bertrand Russell
#25
Posted 2007-June-01, 08:44
The card play tends to be good, but sometimes it makes a play from out of the blue.
#26
Posted 2007-June-01, 15:46
mgoetze, on Jun 1 2007, 09:40 AM, said:
Flame, on Jun 1 2007, 02:44 PM, said:
Repeat after me: "GIB is a computer program".
It is not capable of making up bidding agreements on the fly. It will not be able to figure out that you want it to bid 6♥ if it has the Queen. If you bid as if it could figure that sort of thing out, you deserve your bad results.
Do you ever play with gib ?
Playing with Gib you get a FD you can check what a bid Gib made or a Bid you are about to make means. I checked and my bid ment cue bid, and cue bids arent suppose to be passed.
#27
Posted 2007-June-03, 17:51
#28
Posted 2007-June-09, 18:27
hotShot, on Apr 25 2007, 02:46 AM, said:
That confirms my (limited) experience of playing with robots, experts and world-class players on BBO. And GIB seems to be a better bidder.
#29
Posted 2007-June-09, 23:44
non vul against vul, RHO open 2♣ I pass and LHO bids 2♦, partner doubled showing ♦s, RHO bids 2♥. I had 5♦ and a 4 card somewhere else, was thinging of 4♦ maybe even 5♦ but i thought i beter be carfull with gib so i only bid 3♦ (FD explained 3+D), My gib bid 3NT !, it get doubled, i pass and
My gib takes it out to ? 4♦ no 5♦ no 6♦ yes!!!!!!!
#30
Posted 2007-June-10, 13:41
hotShot, on Apr 25 2007, 07:46 AM, said:
But there is a difference in the kind of errors they make. Human player use some sort of reasoning, while GIB uses statistics. So while expert errors still look reasonable, GIB errors seem "mindless".
In this case there is a big chance that the 2♥ bidder is void in ♦ and since we know he is weak and did not have ♥KQJ there is a big chance he does not have ♦J.
Obviously GIB estimated the chance that the ♦ 4-0 distributed higher than the chance that the 2♥ bidder has the ♦J.
I was shocked to read this comment. How can one compare a program without defensive signals, basic understanding of opp bidding, tons of bugs in bidding system and basic design flaws in bidding and defence with expert or advanced or even intermediate human players?
#31
Posted 2007-June-10, 17:34
There are many examples, some more funny then others like the FD saying Gib showed 7+H and 7+D... i guess gib had 14 cards that hand. this 14 cards are pretty rare but many times you find X+ pnts X- pnts on one sentence.
#32
Posted 2007-June-11, 04:28
The bidding went with opps silence:
1♥-1♠
2♣-3♥ showing invite with 3 card support.
#33
Posted 2007-June-11, 04:36
#34
Posted 2007-June-11, 07:01
Flame, on Jun 11 2007, 05:28 AM, said:
♠ 8 5 3 2 ♥ Q 7 2 ♦ T 4 3 ♣ A 4 2
The bidding went with opps silent:
1♥-1♠
2♣-3♥ showing invite with 3 card support.
♠ x ♥ A J T x x ♦ x x ♣ K Q J x x
How can you blame GIB that the trump finesse lost?
#35
Posted 2007-June-11, 14:45
Gerben42, on Jun 11 2007, 10:36 AM, said:
even the design of play is quite wrong. Bridge is game of partnership, a game of hidden information, not a game for double dummy. That means one has to develop a strong artificial intelligence to understand what's going on at the table. That includes "what do opp's bids mean", "how to set the correct constraints and generate random deals fast enough", "what does the signal of partner tell? how does it affect your play?" "what's opp's style of bidding, how to adjust to it?" "what are opps' defensive signals, are they reliable or not, what do they tell you about their hands?" "what type of defence I should make and what effects it'll have on partner? can it simplify and clearify the situation and partner may thus have a clear read of the situation?" It's a very complicated issue. And bidding should never be based on a dozen of randomly generated hands that may have already set the wrong constraints. Also, the true money comes from some rare events, like "how to guard against some rare distribution and improve your percentage of play", all those rare events can hardly be generated in a dozen of deals. So Zia's bet is still very sound and in a the near future, computer program just has no chance to defeat human players. It really requires a big leap in AI I believe for computer program to have some real chance against humanbeing.
#36
Posted 2007-June-12, 14:19
1♣-1♠
2♣
How much do you like the hand ? Gib thought its invite to game and bid only 3♠.
and another example:
Gib open 1♣
And the bidding
1♣-2♦
3♣
No need to show the ♠ ?
#37
Posted 2007-June-12, 18:17
Here's an example: Today GIB Partner picks up: ♠Ax, ♥Txxx ♦QT9 ♣QTxx.
LHOGIB.....Me......RHOGIB......GIBpard
3♦......3♠......4♦......Pass
This pass is reasonable enough. Even playing responsive doubles, I think the hand doesn't qualify. The bidding continued:
Pass.....4♠......Pass.....
Maybe I don't have a 4♠ call on: ♠KQ9xxx, ♥xx, ♦void, ♣Axxxx, however, but there was 5 minutes left in the MBT and I needed to play some catchup.
4♠ is icy: spades are 3-2, and the club king is on my left. However, GIB chose a 5♠ call......
#38
Posted 2007-June-14, 16:03
EW should go down at least 2 in 4♣X, but instead it pulls my double so that we can go down 2 instead. At least it was wise enough to run from 4♥X to 5♦, I think we'd have gone down 3 in that.
2 boards later, we have this one, which could be my own fault:
-- -- -- P
P 1♥ 2♣ P
P X 2♠ P
P X P 3♦
4♣ P P X
P 4♥ X P
P 5♦ X All Pass
Making 4. Was I wrong in assuming my 2♠ bid was forcing? Did I need to bid 3♠?

Help

-- -- -- P
P 1♥ 2♣ P
P X 2♠ P
P X P 3♦
4♣ P P X
P 4♥ X P
P 5♦ X All Pass