[nige1]

https://www.bridgeba...&username=nige1

https://tinyurl.com/y3bbjm5n

https://tinyurl./y3bbjm5comn

On board #12, Gib awards me a bottom rather than a top

---

[LBengtsson]

The robot defense on all the other boards stinks!

[paulg]

The other declarers made the defenders more difficult by cashing the spades earlier, whereas you made the robots' lives easier. I'm not saying you misplayed it, but others gave the robots a better chance of going wrong.

[nige1]

Paulg saya "The other declarers made the defenders more difficult by cashing the spades earlier, whereas you made the robots' lives easier. I'm not saying you misplayed it, but others gave the robots a better chance of going wrong.[/hv]

After West's ♥ lead, there was no defence to my line for 11 tricks


https://www.bridgeba...&username=nige1

The result sheet shows that 3N+2 should be a top

[paulg]

nige1, on 2022-April-21, 12:19, said:

The result sheet shows that 3N+2 should be a top

The traveller shows that five declarers made an extra trick and there were two averages. If BBO did Neuberg scoring then you would at least score more than 0%.

https://www.bridgeba...&username=nige1

[LBengtsson]

It is an interesting board to post nige1.

By the way you played the hand you gave yourself extra chance to make 12 tricks with East ♠Qxx as opposed to some other declarers who I looked at who lead small ♠ to ♠J10 at trick 2.

I assume this was robot at advanced level. If so, then either robot is programmed badly, or robot cannot signal suit length to robot partner. This gives me hope Robots are still years away from playing bridge at expert human level. If four human players were at this table, I would assume that 90% would have got defense right and held declarer to 11 tricks as opposed to poor defense with inaccurate declarer play that gave all other tables 12 tricks.

In America they have an expression for this: you got screwed over (by machine)

[nige1]

paulg, on 2022-April-21, 13:03, said:

The traveller shows that five declarers made an extra trick and there were two averages. If BBO did Neuberg scoring then you would at least score more than 0%.
tps://www.bridgeba...&username=nige1

Thank you Paul for taking the trouble to point out my error I was so sure that my line was optimal (eg. RHO might hold ♠Q) that I failed to spot an opportunity for defensive error

[nige1]

LBengtsson, on 2022-April-21, 14:59, said:

It is an interesting board to post nige1.

By the way you played the hand you gave yourself extra chance to make 12 tricks with East ♠Qxx as opposed to some other declarers who I looked at who lead small ♠ to ♠J10 at trick 2.

I assume this was robot at advanced level. If so, then either robot is programmed badly, or robot cannot signal suit length to robot partner. This gives me hope Robots are still years away from playing bridge at expert human level. If four human players were at this table, I would assume that 90% would have got defense right and held declarer to 11 tricks as opposed to poor defense with inaccurate declarer play that gave all other tables 12 tricks.

In America they have an expression for this: you got screwed over (by machine)

Thank you LBengtsson

[smerriman]

I suspect nige1 was looking at the results sheet for his 12 boards (where 660 happens to be the highest score), rather than the results for board 12

[johnu]

paulg, on 2022-April-21, 07:42, said:

The other declarers made the defenders more difficult by cashing the spades earlier, whereas you made the robots' lives easier. I'm not saying you misplayed it, but others gave the robots a better chance of going wrong.

nige1 took a line that had a legitimate chance for 12 tricks with 3-3 hearts, 3-3 spades with queen onside. I happened to look at player 4 telepov who started off like nige1 in cashing hearts, crossing to a diamond, cashing a heart, and taking the spade finesse.

The robots misdefended at the end and telepov ended up with 12 tricks. The difference was that nige1 pitched a diamond on the 4th heart, and telepov pitched a club. I think that was a mistake, as South will end up showing exactly 5 spades and 3 hearts. If you pitch a diamond, then you have shown 3 diamonds after playing ♦AK, so probably should have 2 clubs, and have already played ♣A. So AFAIK, south should be 5=3=3=2 instead of 5=3=4=1 for the 2NT rebid. By pitching a club, South's 13th card could be a club or a diamondl

Still, against telepov, GIB W kept the ♣Q at trick 12 when the only outstanding club out was ♣K which ended up pseudo squeezing GIB E.