[msheald]

Hello! GIB is enjoyable, however, there are a number of hands where the bidding is sufficiently different from my Standard American experience, that I concede all 13 tricks and just go on to the next hand. Examples include hands where the description does not match the hand, poorly played negative doubles, failure to play RONF, and poor rebids after 1 NT opener (like transferring to minor with 4 cards).

I realize that there are those who have studied the robot system and can play within the programming. I realize that there are others who would play these hands (and the below examples) differently. I salute such folks. For me, I would rather spend my limited time studying what might happen in games against human players. However, I play these robot games because I enjoy them even with the foibles. My hope is that BBO might make improvements in the robots so that the play more closely mimics that in human games.

It seems that I've thrown in many more hands with Ben than with GIB during the Interstate Robot Individual. For example, in today's deals -

https://tinyurl.com/26k7yxwt

The robot is a passed hand. My rebid of 2H shows 12 to 14 points and 6 cards. Why would the robot go to 3H with 2 card support and 9 HCP? We don't have game. I would expect my human partner to pass it out unless he has some unusual card length holding to justify game exploration, which is not the case here.

https://tinyurl.com/27lnnvk2

Why bid 3D in this case. I might have as few as 3 diamonds according to SAYC. Why not use a negative double to show majors or 3 spades to show 5 cards, especially with a void in ops suit?

https://tinyurl.com/26axxjcg

Ben passes the opening 1D bid I might have as few as 3 cards in the diamond suit. Surely, it can find a better bid? I realize that it is personal preference, but I would prefer to try 1NT and possibly go down less than diamonds when ops have the majority of the trump suit.

https://tinyurl.com/2bqotnsz

My takeout double and bid of hearts when partner bids spades shows 17+ points and an an excellent 5-card heart suit or a good 6+ card heart suit. Robot rebidding spades with 5 to the jack when it has 2 heart is very unusual to me.

https://tinyurl.com/2y3282fw

By now in the game, I'm just discouraged, so I won't be playing very closely. Robot shows 3+ heart support and 11+ total points. My rebid of 3H shows a minimum and 5 hearts. With 11 total points in robot, I think a game try is rather risky, with two club losers and possibly 2 to 3 spade losers. Why risk it?

https://tinyurl.com/28cm4dt7

And finally, sometimes strange robot bidding and play works to my advantage. Who would have thought that me essentially throwing in the towel on the last hand would result in a 100% board? Best regards.

Mike

[mycroft]

1 diamond shows 4 cards in competition (or even "competition").

Playing 5533 with 15-17, you will have 4+ diamonds 97% of the time. Ignore the "it could be 3", you'll be eaten alive if you don't (yes, even counting the losses when you play a 7-card fit at the 3 level). Similarly, playing 5542, ignore the "it could be 2" in competition; it's the same 3% of hands.

Specifically, re: passing the "it could be 3" 1♦, *my* partners have a balanced 18 when I don't pass. Or, after 1♠, they bid something hopeless and crazy like 3♠ on a good 16 (maybe even with 4=4=4=1!) or 4♣ with 4=4=4=1, or 4♦ with 4=2=6=1 (or worse, 4=1=6=2). Which would be fine if, you know, I had *my* bid and not a misfitting "zero" count. Passing in a standard or 2/1 system has been "standard" forever, and while it may not be best, "If I'm going to get yelled at whenever I make the wrong guess, I might as well be yelled at undoubled".(*)

Again, I'm the last bridge pessimist, but a lot of your "refuse to play"s are "I wish partner had been more pessimistic and played me for minimums". Which minimize going down, but also minimize game bonuses and double partscore swings in your favour.

(*) Having said this, it's one of the joys of playing Precision; I *can* run away with these kinds of hands and not get hanged by partner.

[msheald]

Thanks. SAYC is minimum of 3D with 4432 distro.

Mike

[smerriman]

 msheald, on 2025-March-29, 11:45, said:

Thanks. SAYC is minimum of 3D with 4432 distro.

Mike

But as mycroft stated, the probability you hold 3 when opening 1♦ is about 3%, and this decreases when the opponents have hands that they can compete with. That's why the standard advice for this opening is that you should bid as if it had guaranteed 4 - if you try to compensate by being nervous about diamonds, your results will be a lot worse.

[smerriman]

For reference:

1) GIB would pass 2♥, as you want.
2) GIB would double, as you want.
5) GIB would pass, as you want.

On 3), anything but pass would be crazy here. Either South has a strong hand - quite likely, in which you're going to start jumping and end up way too high - or not, in which case more often than not you'd be happy to play in 1♦ when the opponents have most of the points.

On 4) double-and-new-suit has always been a major issue for GIB, so it would also struggle here - (a basic robot would show heart support despite that being described as 3+, advanced GIB would be torn between 2♠ and hearts as well, because it thinks you'll only have 5 hearts a lot of the time).

Ben's bids are described like GIBs, but they're really not connected - it was trained to figure out for itself what the bids mean based on a large set of played hands, but doesn't have to stick to the descriptions, so you really have no idea what it's playing. It's probably not the right robot for you to play with.

[mycroft]

Apologies, I was abbreviating. When I said "if you play 5533", I meant like SAYC, that your minimums are 5 if a major and 3 if a minor. Similarly, "5542" means 5 if a major, 4 if diamonds, clubs could be 2 on 4=4=3=2.

So I was agreeing with you. I was also saying that wherever you put the 4=4=3=2 hands, when bidding - especially in competition - you assume partner doesn't have that, and has the usual 4 diamonds (or 3 clubs).

[Huibertus]

First example. 2♥ does NOT mean 6-card. It means twice rebiddable. That is a 7-card or a better 6 card. As mentioned by others learn "biddable", "rebiddable", "twice rebiddable". On top of that, the ACTUAL hand is NOT a terrible 4♥ at all! You need to play ♥s for 1 loser, which is possible if East has AQ, AQ9, Q9 and Q9X. It's not great but must bid at imps, and borderline in Match points. The actual break is bad luck.

Second example: Preempting exists because opponents don't always have the perfect solution for bidding after a preempt, a negative double looks ok-ish but isn't. Your partner can't afford you to pass, so has to bid. 3♦ is the least lied of any bid. And of course 5♦ is lay down as ♥ King doubleton sits right. You don't need to discard a ♣, that can be ruffed at trick 13 or so. You need the ♥s for zero losers, so finesse it trick 2, you make the Queen and switch to drawing trumps hoping ♥ K will fall later. Nothing the opponents can do.


Example 3: This happens, You do have misfits when partner doesn't hold enough to bid after your opening on occasion. When he starts bidding with 0-5HCP simply because of a misfit you will end up in 18-19 HCP opposing 0 HCP 3NT doubled for a lot on many occasions. Just accept this. Pass IS the right bid. Just take your 3 tricks for -200. It is very likely the other table/player make 3NT as this can ONLY be Beaten when you play ♣ A, small ♣ on time, which is possible but not automatic.


Example 4: You are drop dead minimum for double followed by 2♥ , I wouldn't have bid like this because of QJ ♦ doubleton in their suit being worth a lot less then 3HCP, but you can. You do need to realize though that you don't deny 3♠s. This could very well be 4♠ by ruffing out ♥ Q and NOT 4♥ because of losing ♥ Q. 2♠ is not unreasonable and playing ♥s remains possible.

Example 5: You need to play ♦9 trick 1. So you can finesse ♦ later on if you want to without being stuck in dummy when the 9 is not covered. Then on this hand two round of trumps (seeing the split) you play ♦ over to the Ace and indeed finesse to discard a ♣ in dummy (as you MUST discard a ♣, so the 4 card ♥ also has to have 4 ♦s). Then play ♠ K as you want West (not having trumps) on lead. The only way West can beat you then is by underleading ♣ A so east can remove the trump in dummy. Possible, but unlikely.


Example 6: That was clumsy defense indeed, we all benefit of it at times.

So, summarized advise, play these hands seriously, you could learn and improve your game in the process.

[mycroft]

Interestingly, I had a 3) choice this weekend in our GNT district finals.
I was unhappy bidding with this hand for exactly the reasons I mentioned for your example, but I did anyway. Now I did have some things that pushed in bidding's favour, that you don't with GIB/Ben:

• We're playing a weak NT. Partner's most common responses will be 1NT (15-17) where I'm "back where everyone else is" (but see later) or 2♠, showing "15-17 playing points in support of spades", or 2♣ with an 'overstrength preempt' which I can happily pass.
  
• 1♣ is much more likely to be 3 than 1♦ (17% IIRC?).
  
• We're playing IMPs, where even if I turn a positive into a negative, it won't be a *big* negative, so a small loss. Passing could be a bigger loss.
  
• The opponents holding our cards play Precision, and can't open this hand (naturally) 1♣. I don't know their NT range exactly, but if they open 1♦, they have even less chance of having a diamond fit (or passing, see previous comment); if they open 1NT, they're probably playing it there; if they open 2♣, my partner would rebid 2♣; and if they open 1♣, then they'll find the right place, and it won't be 1♣ on a misfit.

But still, partner jumped to 3 (showing 18 at least, thanks!) and I had to play carefully to make it. The opponents were in 2♠ (on a competitive strong club auction), but without the interference could easily have been in 1NT - but not 1♣. It was a risk, and it would have 100% been on me if it was wrong; but it was much less likely to be wrong than your 3). I even said, when 3♠ hit, "I'm being paid back for what I said in this thread"!

[Huibertus]

mycroft, on 2025-March-30, 11:05, said:

Interestingly, I had a 3) choice [url="https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=pn|LHO_,GentlePartner,RHO_,Mycroft|st%7C%7Cmd%7C3S25KH24AD2348QC69%2CS69JAH9TKD9JC4QKA%2CS4QH35JQD6AC2358T%2C%7Crh%7C%7Cah%7CBoard%209%7Csv%7Ce%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C1C%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C1S%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C3S%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CS7%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CSQ%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CST%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CS9%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CH9%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cmc%7C9%7C"] partner jumped to 3 (showing 18 at least, thanks!) and I had to play carefully to make it.

Had your partner put you in 4♠ you would also have made it on careful play (thanks to a no-lethal lead). You need to get the ♣ and ♥ King as tricks, so you need to preserve an entry to play toward ♥ K AND be able to cash it. That's possible, assuming space honors are split and lead is from shortness south is likely to have the longer ♠, they need to be 3-2 and they Aces onside. So, take trick 1 in dummy preserving ♣ Jack, play ♠ Jack. If North ducks you have to play the Ace second round. Assume north Take the Q you now have 2 entries to finesse South's ♠ K first and later to play ♥ up to the King. So now you lose ♠ Q, ♥ Ace and ♦ Ace only, 1 ♦ to be ruffed in dummy and 2 ♣ to discard the losing ♦ and ♥ that remain. A terrible contract and an good swing!