[Bbradley62]

---

Why does East double 3♣ when he prefers diamonds? Is he presuming he can correct to diamonds if partner bids more clubs later?

Why does the description of East's double of 5♦ not say anything more than the description of his first double? Is he not saying anything about his diamond holding?

[Vampyr]

LOL it cracks me up that some people say that playing with robots is the purest test of bridge skill (rather than, say luck or skill at gaming the robots), while the single most popular topic on the forums is how badly the robots bid or play!

[fuburules3]

Vampyr, on 2012-May-27, 19:33, said:

LOL it cracks me up that some people say that playing with robots is the purest test of bridge skill (rather than, say luck or skill at gaming the robots), while the single most popular topic on the forums is how badly the robots bid or play!

The entire point of this forum is to report bidding bugs so they can be fixed . . .

[Vampyr]

fuburules3, on 2012-May-27, 20:46, said:

The entire point of this forum is to report bidding bugs so they can be fixed . . .

Bugs? In the arbiter of bridge excellence? Surely not!

[Stephen Tu]

I think the idea about GIB being the "purest test of bridge skill" isn't that GIB is so good, but that it's the only way to equalize skill of the opponents, and your partner. Even if GIB is buggy, it still accomplishes this task. People who consistently do well despite being partnered by an erratic robot are very likely better than those who don't.

I do think GIB tourneys are reasonable tests of declarer play skill overall. What is untested a lot is defensive skill, since GIB doesn't understand signalling, and bidding judgment/skill in complicated auctions likely to hit a bidding hole in the database, you can't bid perfectly when your partner refuses to cooperate.

And even though I make a ton of complaints about GIB, the reality is that for every bug I report, there are dozens of boards where it bid fine, played OK, and nothing really to report. The instructions on this forum for "one thread per bug" encourage the high thread count here.

[fuburules3]

Vampyr, on 2012-May-27, 20:56, said:

Bugs? In the arbiter of bridge excellence? Surely not!

Even the best pairs in the world have bidding mix ups that they discuss afterwards and fix. This isn't really any different. In any event, seems besides the point as I don't think anyone has ever claimed GIB plays perfectly.

[Leo LaSota]

Vampyr, on 2012-May-27, 19:33, said:

LOL it cracks me up that some people say that playing with robots is the purest test of bridge skill (rather than, say luck or skill at gaming the robots), while the single most popular topic on the forums is how badly the robots bid or play!

It is very sad that you continue to post on something that you have no actual experience participating in. The purpose of these GIB robot discussion topics is to discuss certain bidding situations and card play scenarios that individuals have seen that they believe the programmers of GIB should update. Most, if not all of the participants in the ACBL robot games would agree with me that the GIB robot is programmed to bid, defend, and declare many of the hands very well. Very few individuals would agree with your statement that the secret to robot bridge is "luck or skill at gaming the robots".