[benellis58]

Typical JOKE of a "defence" by the two zeroes sitting East-West...two zeroes who coincidentally add yet ANOTHER zero to their already IMMENSE lifetime collection.

https://www.bridgeba...S8%7Cmc%7C12%7C

[benellis58]

Trick two: East drops the jack of hearts from J53. Why? How can it possibly gain on this hand? I can see how it COULD sometimes LOSE, but it CAN'T gain. Typical GIBBO "brilliance".

https://www.bridgeba...SQ%7Cpc%7CSK%7C

[benellis58]

Yes, leads are often a guess. Yes, their success or failure can depend on luck and on the random layout of a random hand. Yes, on some hands, West's lead might have worked. But having said all that, leading the club queen from Q8 doubleton after LHO opened 1C does not seem like a wise choice here.

https://www.bridgeba...HT%7Cmc%7C12%7C

[benellis58]

North's double is defined as "13+ HCP; 14+ total points", which strikes me as a bad definition for several reasons. It would be better to indicate the MOTIVE. In other words, is it penalty? Takeout? "Cards"? DSI? Three suits? Spades? WHAT? There are considerations of greater importance than mere UNDEFINED bean-counting.

And EVEN if it's SOLELY about bean-counting, why at least 13 HCP? There are many hands where, depending on what your INTENTION is and your partnership AGREEMENT is (i.e.: the possibilities mentioned in the first paragraph), you might have a FINE double with fewer than 13 HCP...AND, notice that on this very hand North had "only" ELEVEN HCP - thereby violating his own GIB definition! It's not his call that I object to - it's the definition! And if the robots are not going to respect their own definition anyway, then...change the (lousy) definition.

Also, what's with "14+ total points"? TYPICALLY, all the GIB definition has done is to add one point to the defined number of HCP, foolishly thinking - for absolutely NO reason - that this will MAGICALLY arrive at the correct number of "total" points. Wake-up call: It WON'T! Furthermore, why are "total" points even MENTIONED, since no fit has been identified?

Maybe out of the NUMEROUS problems with the GIBBO sytem, robots, and definitions, the first issue that should be addressed is a complete revamping of the execrable GIB definitions.

https://www.bridgeba...ST%7Cpc%7CS6%7C

[benellis58]

Why the Hell is West bidding 3D on this auction? Even the definition is useless, as it repeats word for word the definition of his earlier double of 1C, only omitting the words "takeout double".

I often criticize the GIBBO robots for their hideous bidding, but I have some sympathy for them, considering that they are constrained by such a poor, antiquated system and by consistently useless and ridiculous GIB definitions...such as this one.

https://www.bridgeba...CD3%7Cmc%7C8%7C

[benellis58]

Why 4H by North? Wouldn't 3S make more sense?

This board was played 24 times. On 23 of the 24, NS played 4H, going down two 19 times (including at my table) and going down three the other four times. At the 24th table, the anonymous human South bizarrely (but wisely, as it turned out) PASSED 3D and NS beat it one trick for a top.

https://www.bridgeba...CC2%7Cmc%7C8%7C

[benellis58]

West's 1S is defined as "One-level overcall - 5+ spades; 8-17 HCP; 9-19 total points".

West actually has only FOUR spades. I have no problem whatsoever with his bid, but the GIB definition is WRONG and is also DISHONEST...because this is far from the first time that the GIBBO robots have made an overcall on a four-bagger. Fine: let them continue to do so...but change the definition so that it reflects the TRUTH. It should either say "4+ spades" or "usually 5+ spades but is sometimes done with four". And BTW, the words "One-level overcall" are - guess what, GIB - NOT needed! They say NOTHING that ANY bridge player does not already know. They are unnecessary, annoying, and insulting!

The GIBBO robot declaring the hand played the spade (trump) suit in a LAUGHABLY bad way.

https://www.bridgeba...CDK%7Cmc%7C7%7C

[benellis58]

North says that he wants to play this hand in 3H. This raises the question: Is North certifiably insane, or is he just one of the worst bridge players in the history of the world? It has to be one or the other.

https://www.bridgeba...HK%7Cpc%7CD6%7C

[benellis58]

If the GIBBO system recommends that North should bid 3NT with his hand, and given the typically wretched GIB definition apparently it does, then this is another of the countless examples illustrating why the GIBBO system is unworkable, illogical trash. No wonder the GIBBO robots are such hopeless bidders when they're saddled with such a joke of a system.

https://www.bridgeba...CQ%7Cmc%7C10%7C

[benellis58]

At trick 10 the GIBBO robot sitting West plays his club 10...to GUARANTEE that declarer CANNOT go wrong in the suit. As I've said many times, the GIBBO robots are stunningly bad bridge players, but they are very pleasant personalities, always GENEROUSLY doing their utmost to help their OPPONENTS achieve good scores.

https://www.bridgeba...CT%7Cmc%7C11%7C

[benellis58]

Why is West leading his worthless doubleton diamond rather than a club, the suit his partner opened? Answer: Because he's a GIBBO robot and they HATE leading partner's suit.

https://www.bridgeba...CJ%7Cmc%7C10%7C

[benellis58]

This is the same hand as the one in post #930 immediately above, but from a different table. I am posting it to show how thunderously hopeless the GIBBO robots are at bidding, how abominable their system is, and how truly wretched their GIB definitions are.

The anonymous human South begins with a double. Lord knows why, but I'm not here to bash humans. When Diana had the great inspiration to create this essential thread, she named it "Benellis58 GIB bashing on repeat", thereby creating its mission statement: to (quite justifiably) bash the (horrendous) GIB robots.

The intention of the thread is, of course, to do this "bashing" in order to alert the powers that be to the numerous flaws that need to be corrected...so that when the corrections are FINALLY done, the improved GIBBO robots will provide a far better experience for all BBO users and customers, which will in turn be to the benefit of BBO itself. A good product retains its customers and adds new ones. A bad product loses customers to its competitors.

After South's strange choice of double, West bids 2H and North bids 3C. 3C is stupidly and completely uselessly defined by GIB as "11- HCP; 11-12 total points". What utter garbage! North had previously PASSED as dealer, and since the robots open all hands with 12 or more HCP, we already knew that he had at most 11. Furthermore, the lazy statement "11- HCP" literally means "0-11 HCP", so this tells us absolutely NOTHING! And yet, the GIBBO system obviously RECOMMENDS this totally USELESS call - a CUEBID yet (!) since enemy East opened the bidding with 1C. I'm thinking that - golly gee - maybe a CUEBID at this point should actually MEAN something! But I guess such a concept is WAY beyond the intellectual capacity of the GIBBO system!

East passes the absurd and useless 3C bid, and the human South now bids 3S. West passes, and North...PASSES! North is LOOKING at - in his OWN hand - FOUR (!) pretty good spades HIMSELF (QJ75). He is ALSO looking at an ACE (in diamonds) AND the KJ5 of hearts BEHIND the enemy heart bidder! Add those up and you'll come to ELEVEN HCP, the MAXIMUM he could have held, according to the atrocious GIB definition of his fatuous 3C call, and a full ELEVEN more than he might have had, considering that "11-" literally means "0-11". And yet this twit PASSES 3S!

https://www.bridgeba...S8%7Cpc%7CCJ%7C

[benellis58]

I made 10 tricks and scored a shared top of 91.18 % on the board, so it turned out fine, but that does not excuse North's typically pathetic bidding.

These GIBBO robot dunces usually do what this incompetent fool did here: When their partner shows at least a sixth card in his major by rebidding the suit over their forcing 1NT response, they OVERBID. They raise to three when they should pass two, and they LEAP to four when they should merely invite by bidding three. If it turns out well (as it did here) they have usually gained NOTHING because with a hand good enough for game their partner would usually accept the invitation anyway. But if it turns out poorly, they have LOST something - either by converting a plus score to a minus or by making a minus score a bigger minus score.

Conclusion: Yet ANOTHER recurring example of robot ignorance in bidding, and also yet ANOTHER example of why the poor GIBBO robots are VICTIMIZED by their stunningly bad GIBBO system, which obviously MANDATES this stupid leap to game in such situations.

https://www.bridgeba...S3%7Cmc%7C10%7C

[benellis58]

West is "defending" 3NT. After four tricks have been played, his side has taken three. He needs to take two more tricks to beat the contract. He is LOOKING AT those two tricks in his OWN hand, because he has the 84 of spades, the 8 is the HIGHEST spade remaining, and there is only ONE other spade left (the 5), which he knows that his partner holds. Thus, West KNOWS that all he has to do is play his spade 8 (dropping his partner's 5) for the FOURTH defensive trick and then cash the spade 4 (which by then will be the ONLY remaining spade) for the FIFTH defensive trick, thereby defeating the contract.

Easy, right? Even the worst human bridge player would do this, right? Yes...and yes...but this was MUCH too difficult for the GIBBO robot, because the incompetent M.O.R.O.N....did NOT cash his spades. He (incredibly!) played the 9 of hearts (!!!) and declarer rattled off 8 of the remaining 9 tricks to score up his "impossible" game and to give the criminally hopeless GIBBO robots yet ANOTHER zero to add to their overflowing, record-breaking, massive lifetime collection of COMPLETE failures.

Tell me again please, GIBBO defenders and apologists, about how the GIBBO robots are "better than most human bridge players". I promise I'll listen - because I ALWAYS enjoy a good LAUGH!

https://www.bridgeba...HQ%7Cpc%7CHK%7C

[benellis58]

The time has come to either improve the GIBBO robots or throw them into a scrap heap and replace them with better ones.

[benellis58]

If the GIBBO robots are not HUGELY improved...OR tossed in a garbage can and replaced by DECENT robots, this thread could last until the end of time and NEVER run out of material, because the GIBBO robots are THAT bad. There is SOMETHING that could be reported on just about EVERY hand these losers are involved in - whether it's their pathetic, antiquated system, their horrendous GIB definitions, their lousy opening leads, their failure to signal or to follow signals on the rare occasions that signals ARE used, their disregard for spot cards, their total lack of logic, or the numerous other flaws that pop up hand after hand after hand.

Look at this nonsensical play for just ONE example of their total cluelessness:

At trick five, declarer West leads his 8 of clubs towards dummy East's KJ10963. Not a single club has been played by anyone prior to this, so all 13 clubs are still in play. North's clubs are Q7 doubleton. He plays...the QUEEN! He is LOOKING at KJ10963 (!) in the dummy...which will play AFTER him...and he plays his QUEEN from Q7 doubleton! Even the GIBBO robot who is declaring can now get THIS "guess" right!

Now, had North played the NORMAL 7 from Q7 doubleton, a play that even the WORST human bridge player I EVER encountered would make with NO problem, declarer might well have guessed right anyway by making the "normal" play of playing for the queen onside. So, who knows (?), but there's a good chance that North's ASTOUNDING play of the queen from Q7 doubleton, looking at THAT dummy, might not have cost - but who cares? The point is that it was an INCREDIBLY stupid play that could NEVER gain, could sometimes cost, and at BEST would break even. These total fools FREQUENTLY commit idiocies of this type - making ZERO percent plays and/or removing declarer's guesses and turning (say) 50 % plays for declarer into GUARANTEED hundred percent plays where he CANNOT go wrong.

These GIBBO robots are by FAR the absolutely worst "bridge players" I have EVER seen. They rot worse than month-old garbage and they are an embarrassment to the game of bridge.

Our score on this board, BTW, was 67.9 %, so I am NOT crying about the result - I am, as always, just exposing yet ANOTHER example of the endless incompetence of these GIBBO buffoons in the hope that the powers that be will take the necessary steps to FINALLY improve them, because right now they are garbage.

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/2p8pncpn

[benellis58]

Why on EARTH is the dimwitted GIBBO robot (sorry for the needless insertion of the word "dimwitted" because I'm sure you already KNEW that he was dimwitted...from the very fact that he IS a GIBBO robot) bidding 3D over South's 2S? South earlier PASSED North's 1S bid, so there is obviously no game...and South's 2S call promised "4+ spades" according to the GIB definition, so North KNOWS that spades are a good fit.

So, to recap and to add a bit:

North bids 3D over 2S, despite the fact that NS cannot have a game.
North bids 3D over 2S, despite KNOWING that NS have a good spade fit (his four opposite South's KNOWN four, as per the GIB definition of 2S).
North bids 3D over 2S even though they might have ONLY (!) a 3-3 (!) diamond fit, since he himself has only three, and the GIB definition of South's 2S said that the bid showed "3+ diamonds". So...when...
North bids 3D over 2S, he is KNOWINGLY pulling a GUARANTEED 4-4 spade fit to what might be ONLY a 3-3 diamond fit!
North bids 3D over 2S, despite the fact that his partnership will now need to take NINE tricks to make their contract, whereas they needed only EIGHT to make 2S.
North bids 3D over 2S, despite the fact that this is a matchpoint game and spades score more than diamonds!

Conclusion: North is a typical GIBBO robot, meaning that he is one of the worst "bridge players" of all time - as the LITANY of atrocities in the six statements (or should I say "six INDICTMENTS" ?!) above makes very clear!

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/2p98sxd2

[benellis58]

I've mentioned before that I often play what I call "Hearts-Style Challenges" just for fun (?) and variety. I go to the "Challenge" section and click on "Challenge a Robot". I then play four boards with a robot "partner" against robot opponents. The game is free and nothing is at stake. It does not affect any humans in any way.

The robots, of course, are playing their "normal" bridge game ("normal" for GIBBO robots, that is - but not normal for anyone who has a CLUE about how to play bridge) and they are unaware that I am trying to LOSE as many tricks as possible. At my first opportunity, I bid 7NT on every hand, redouble if doubled, and then try to LOSE as many tricks as possible. A perfect result would be down 13.

Take a look at this deal:

West is on lead against 7NT redoubled. North passed. East opened 1D and I, South, jumped to 7NT. West and North passed, East doubled, and I redoubled.

West has J1098753, KQJ, 7, Q9. Against 7NT redoubled, the king of hearts seems reasonable...but West doesn't lead that. His stiff diamond 7 (the suit his partner opened)? No, he doesn't lead that - probably wisely! A club from Q9 doubleton? That looks like a lead the GIBBO robots LOVE to make, but no - he doesn't lead that either.

He leads a spade. Well, at least that looks safe with his long sequence...EXCEPT that...from J1098753, he led...the...FIVE! I guess he was afraid to "waste" his jack...or ten...or nine...or eight...or seven (!!!!!!!!!!!). Note that they now usually lead fourth best, and he didn't even lead THAT (which obviously would have been bizarre anyway!). He led his SIXTH-best...the first card NOT in his "solid" FIVE-card sequence, and...

He did this against SEVEN (!) NT redoubled (!)...AND he did it in preference to leading a heart...from KQJ (!) ...against SEVEN no trump redoubled!

Please, please, PLEASE, dear defenders and apologists of the BBO robots, PLEASE tell me AGAIN how they are "better than most human players".

In fairness, I must point out that I believe the robots in the Challenge games are not the "advanced" GIBBO robots, so perhaps they are not as "good" (ha, HA, HA!) as the "advanced" ones...but if that is so, imagine how INCREDIBLY bad they must be, because I play with the "advanced" ones every day and THEY are TRULY abysmal themselves!

https://www.bridgeba...S3%7Cpc%7CD4%7C

[benellis58]

Another example of something that happens often - TOO often - with the execrable GIBBO robots:

The GIB definition of West's 3H begins "3+ hearts". West's hand is Q10742, KJ, 97, AKQ5. Do YOU see "3+ hearts" in his hand? You don't? Oh, good! I was afraid I might have to get my eyes checked because I don't see them either. But - gasp - does that mean that the GIB definition LIED to us...OR does it mean that the GIBBO robot once AGAIN ignored his own GIB definition? Because it HAS to be one or the other, and NEITHER is good! It's long PAST the time to fix the definitions and fix the GIBBO robots!

And...once East decides to bid at the FOUR level over West's 3H, shouldn't he, based on the GIB definition of 3H, be bidding four HEARTS rather than four spades?

https://www.bridgeba...H6%7Cpc%7CHQ%7C

[benellis58]

Not my table, but look at North's bidding:

His 4NT call is defined as "Quantitative invite to 6NT - 4+ hearts; 5+ spades; 18-19 HCP; 22- total points".

His hand is AJ963, AQ32, A9, 73. Unlike the GIBBO robots, I can actually count - and I see a mere FIFTEEN HCP, not the 18-19 "promised" by the GIB definition.

Is it any wonder that the bidding of the GIBBO robots is so often absolutely horrendous - considering that they cannot even COUNT?

https://www.bridgeba...S3%7Cmc%7C10%7C