[benellis58]

There are some good players who would agree with the 1NT bid by the GIBBO robot sitting North, and in practice it turned out fine, but there can be no doubt that in spite of the aforementioned statements the robot's choice is questionable.

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/yckmjbca

[benellis58]

In contrast to the post immediately above, however, there can be NO dispute about THIS hand.

The GIBBO robot sitting West gave a textbook example of how overwhelmingly and hopelessly inept he and his brethren are, and he also illustrated why I have often said that I have never in my life EVER seen even a SINGLE human player as outrageously incompetent at all facets of bridge as the GIB/GIBBO robots.

Check out West's extraordinarily stupid lead against South's 6NT:

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/3wwywwzx

[benellis58]

I see that a member named TARIK (all caps) has started a thread called "ROBOTS ARE AWFUL" (again all caps). I can't say I disagree. The next few posts I make here might explain why.

[benellis58]

West begins with one of his favourite leads, and a lead that is often a BAD lead: his stiff trump. After East wins trick two, he shifts to a club, which certainly doesn't look right. Later, West is in and is gracious enough to play a diamond, allowing me access to an otherwise unreachable dummy so that I can claim. East-West score zero percent on the board, which is about what their defensive abilities deserve.

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/yckv5npe

[benellis58]

West foolishly shifts at trick two, kissing his second spade trick goodbye and allowing declarer, who had three "inescapable" losers to lose ONLY two of them.

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/2j2rdtdm

[benellis58]

I purposely underbid (by a LOT!) on this hand. Why? First, because it was a "best hand" game, so I knew my partner North had at most 12 HCP and MIGHT have had less, because I have seen the robots open hands with 11 and even 10 HCP. Second, while I had 12 (!) HCP and 6 great hearts, I wasn't in love with my spades, and I was leery of the possibility that most of pard's values might be in clubs. Third, it was matchpoints, not IMPs. Fourth, not that I want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, and I might be wrong anyway, but my impression is that BBO layouts (breaks and hooks) tend to be much worse than in "real" F2F bridge. Fifth, the robots tend to be OVERbidders, so if North had anything that would make a game reasonable, he might raise me anyway. Sixth, it's "only" a BBO game, not a "real" F2F game. By that, I don't mean to insult the BBO games, because I frequently play them and I do enjoy them and I do try to do as well as possible, but: I tend to "experiment" MUCH more than I would when playing with humans. Why? Because I don't have to worry about harming my partner or teammates if I do something that costs...because they are ROBOTS, not humans! Also, since the ROBOTS are SO bad, my "experiments", while sometimes resulting in bad scores, OFTEN result in good scores due to the overwhelming incompetence of the robots. In a HUMAN game, I would have forced to game rather than bidding a mere 2H.

Here, though, I DID bid only 2H...which opened the door to this post where I can blast the robots for their incompetence.

My bizarre call of (only!) 2H was poorly defined (as is unfortunately SO often the case with GIB definitions!) as "4- clubs; 6+ hearts; 8-12 total points". WHY must the bid show at most four clubs? Why must it show at least 8 total points? And with 12 total points, wouldn't it be normal (despite MY abnormal call!) to make a stronger call than a mere 2H? And then...after West passed, the GIBBO robot sitting North...JUMPED (!) all the way to FOUR (!) hearts! He did this with a mere 12 HCP and only a doubleton heart on a hand where he had already opened the bidding (!) AND opposite a partner (me) whose 2H call, as per the GIB definition, could have been made on as few as EIGHT...total points...not even 8 HCP! See what I mean about the GIBBO robots often being gross OVERbidders?

Before seeing North's hand, I chuckled to myself and was certainly not dismayed or unhappy, because I expected it to be cold, since I had FAR more than I had promised and indeed had FAR more than I SHOULD have had for my huge underbid of 2H!

When I saw the dummy, I didn't just chuckle - I laughed heartily at North's ridiculous bid. I also saw that looking only at the NS hands, it was not a GREAT contract. Sometimes it would make, sometimes it wouldn't. On the auction, the diamond queen rated to be off, so there would be a virtually certain club loser, at least two spade losers, and often a third spade loser. In practice, on this random layout on this random hand, 10 tricks were cold, since there were no bad breaks, spades split 4-3-3-3, and the spade AKJ were ALL (!) onside. I didn't even NEED that lucky spade layout, though, as I was able to set up clubs for a spade pitch. For some reason this scored 96.4 %, so it turned out fine that North made his crazy 4H bid - although since my 2H had been a HUGE underbid, I would have bid 4H anyway had he only raised to three.

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/3mv7jrta

[benellis58]

The PATHETICALLY bad definition of North's double is "13+ HCP; 14+ total points". This is an excellent example of how incredibly useless and uninformative the GIB definitions sadly so often are. It's also hilarious, because the GIBBO robot sitting North ignored his own GIB definition, as these hopeless creatures often do. He actually had...a mere...SIX (!!!) HCP. That's right: He "PROMISED" at LEAST 13 (!) HCP...and theoretically as many as 37, since the definition gave NO upper limit on points...yet he had a mere SIX! He had a full SEVEN points fewer than the MINIMUM that his own GIB definition had "promised". To boot, the mere six that he had were ALL in queens and jacks! What a JOKE!

Ironically, however, I have nothing against his decision to double. It's the ABSURD definition that I object to...as well as the fact that although his double was not bad in and of itself, it bore no relation whatsoever to the typically worthless GIB definition!

Our result was fine, as I bid the normal 4H over his double, played it there, laughed (as I often do) when I saw his dummy, and made 12 tricks for plus 680 and a score of 100 % on the board. The good score, however, in NO way reduces the utter contempt I have for the abysmal GIBBO robots and the execrable GIB definitions.

East's total lack of defensive ability was also amusing. For one thing, it showcased the terminally foolish habit the GIBBO robots have of unnecessarily splitting too soon. He inserted his spade 10 from KJ107 on the first round of the suit. Did he REALLY think I would stick in the NINE if he played the 7?. The robots blow NUMEROUS defences with this foolish habit of theirs - often committing even worse sins than those displayed here.


https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/hp6t9tkj

[benellis58]

West leads one of his suits. Well done. But not THAT well done, because he leads his weaker FOUR-card suit rather than his stronger FIVE-card suit. Where, where, WHERE is the logic???

One random hand never proves anything, but for what it's worth, on THIS random hand, I took an easy twelve tricks after his club lead. East COULD have won his club ace and shifted to diamonds, which would have held me to EIGHT tricks rather than TWELVE (and ONLY because the diamond suit blocks, or else I would be held to SEVEN tricks). OR West could have prevented East from going wrong by the simple act of leading his longer and stronger suit in the first place!

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/yckn5ra6

[benellis58]

The result on this board was fine: 100 % for beating EW two tricks in 6C. But is there any bridge player on the planet apart from a GIBBO robot who would lead a HEART (!) on this auction rather than a diamond? And, BTW, I don't think the EW auction deserves a brilliancy prize either...particularly West's raise to 6C on his MINIMUM opener: a 12-count, with ONLY three (relatively lousy!) clubs AND two little diamonds!

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/2p8put6p

[benellis58]

It's worth noting that the hands discussed in this thread are just a tiny number of the ones in which the GIBBO robots commit egregious errors. Their atrocities are so frequent that it would be impossible to document them all.

[benellis58]

I have written a few times in the past about the mindblowing stupidity of the GIBBO structure for 2C openings and responses, particularly GIBBO's astoundingly bad use of responder's 2NT bid over pard's 2C opener, and the correspondingly pathetic definition of the call. I could go on and on, but suffice it to say that the structure desperately needs improvement. Here is what happened at my table. On this random board I scored 72.17%, but whether it had been 100 % or zero percent, it would not have changed the fact that the GIBBO 2C structure is ludicrous and repulsive. The top score on the board was achieved by a player who wisely IGNORED the hopeless system and operated by opening 2NT. The subsequent defence by the GIBBO robots was typically horrendous and he emerged with 12 tricks. I will show HIS hand in the post right after this one. But pathetic GIBBO defending is not the subject in THIS post. Here's the hand from my table, but read the following post for the hand at the other table I mentioned. It's worth a laugh also.

https://www.bridgeba...DJ%7Cpc%7CD3%7C

[benellis58]

And here's the hand I mentioned in the post right above this one. Note that the human wisely ignored the disgusting GIBBO 2C structure by operating with a 2NT opener and then being the beneficiary of typically hopeless defending by the GIBBO robots.

https://www.bridgeba...D6%7Cpc%7CC9%7C

[benellis58]

I opened 1C in third beacause it was a "best hand" game and then passed North's 1S response for the same reason. West now balanced with a natural 2C, which was quite reasonable, and North competed with 2S, probably also reasonable on the auction that had taken place. But then...

After East and South passed, West bid THREE clubs - not terrible, but certainly aggressive. North now bid THREE (!) spades, which I think is when we can say "Enough is enough". If it is "right" for NS to be in 3S, surely South should be expected to bid it after North's earlier 1S and 2S bids, so I think North should have passed 3C and left any decisions to South.

But EAST now joined the party, bidding FOUR clubs. In so doing, he turned his side's plus into a minus, because 4C had to go down, and the NS 3S surely would have failed also.

Yes, East has quite a good hand, considering that he has never opened his mouth until now, BUT: First, West was obviously ALREADY counting on values from East, based on his analysis of the auction. That's what competing and balancing are all about. Second, while East DID have a good hand, it was ALSO good defensively. In fact, it was probably BETTER defensively than offensively, given that he had "only" two clubs...and FOUR spades to the J10.

This is nowhere even CLOSE to the REALLY bad things the GIBBO robots frequently do, but I think it's a subtle case of poor judgment by both North and East.

https://www.bridgeba...DT%7Cpc%7CDQ%7C

[benellis58]

Ridiculous 3D bid by East. Did he REALLY think he had a possible game, with his mere 11 HCP including a stiff queen (!) in the enemy suit, and facing a partner (West) who had PASSED as dealer? Yes, his sixth heart is a bonus, but come ON!

https://www.bridgeba...H7%7Cpc%7CD3%7C

[benellis58]

The game made and we scored 95.24 % on the board, but that does NOT excuse North's (typical) overbid of 4S. If game is decent, surely South will bid it himself if North raises to 3S, so this type of overbidding almost never gains anything even if the game makes, but it LOSES whenever the game goes down and South would have refused an invitation. If the GIBBO robots want to mastermind all auctions, they should first improve their overall play by about a million percent.

https://www.bridgeba...S8%7Cmc%7C10%7C

[benellis58]

Typically useless GIB definition of West's pointless 3H call: "5+ spades; 14-17 HCP; 15-19 total points; forcing to 3NT".

First, "5+ spades" was already ASSUMED when he overcalled 1S! Second, he does NOT have "14-17 HCP" - he has a mere TEN - a full FOUR fewer than the MINIMOM that the definition "promises".

And, MORE importantly, shouldn't three HEARTS say something about...oh, I don't know...may be HEARTS???!!! I don't care if your system wants it to show shortness, length, strength, the ace, the ace OR the king, or WHATEVER...but maybe it should say SOMETHING about...HEARTS, and not just give some ridiculous, useless blather about his having five or more spades (which we already knew anyway!) or some ERRONEOUS lies about his HCP! It's no wonder that the GIBBO robots are such hopeless bidders and have such horrible judgment when they are hampered by an incredibly weak system and useless definitions that they often ignore anyway, as West did here.

https://www.bridgeba...D8%7Cpc%7CC9%7C

[benellis58]

I don't personally have a problem with North's 3NT bid, but some players might. I'm posting this hand only because I think that the GIBBO robots usually (used to?) bid the North hand differently. Maybe this change in robotic "thinking" is due to the upgrade from GIB?

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

[benellis58]

Where is North's logic? First he bids 2S, showing a limit raise or better for South's clubs...but clearly it is ONLY a limit raise (and NOT "or better") since he is a passed hand. Okay, fair enough, but THEN...when South shows a flat 11-13 (in a typically poorly-expressed GIB definition), North now FREELY bids 3D, effectively (and very inconsistently) REVERSING.

East now comes alive, reasonably competing with 3H, and is PUNISHED when his "partner" West BURIES him by stupidly raising to an unmakeable FOUR hearts. These fools OFTEN commit this particular atrocity, so the poor partner is often damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Very often it's "right" for him to compete, and if he doesn't he will score poorly...but if he DOES he will score poorly anyway because his lamebrained "partner" will BURY him. No wonder they are worse than any human player I have ever encountered!

https://www.bridgeba...CH6%7Cmc%7C9%7C

[benellis58]

You don't HAVE to guess the clubs when you have GIBBO robots "defending":

https://www.bridgeba...DK%7Cpc%7CDT%7C

[benellis58]

West bids 2S...and then later bids 4S. Positively BRILLIANT "strategy" - NOT! If he was willing to bid 4S anyway, a direct 4S would have made things harder for NS than his weak-kneed sequence did.

Meanwhile, North, for better or worse, certainly fell in LOVE with his flat 3-5-3-2 five-count. Fortunately, on THIS random layout on THIS random hand, it was "for better".

https://www.bridgeba...C8%7Cpc%7CSK%7C