[hantveit]

How can you best test X # of bridge players up against each other to find out whom is the best??

Take away luck in the cards delt, take away the different partner strengths and take away the difference in opponents strength, and you will have the ultimate test!

But this has not been possible, not before lately.

By letting GIB play as partner and opponents you can create the ultimate tourney. It requires that alle players are playing with and against a GIB, that all are playing the same cards and that they all sit in the same direction! (The auto tournaments today, dos not include same cards and seat.)

The winner cannot blame luck, either can the loser...

So BBO - Please make this tourney - ASAP! :-)

Let the ultimate singel test begin...

[hrothgar]

There's a hell of a lot of other changes that you'd need to make...

At the most basic level, you'd need to synchronize all the random number generators that the various GIBs use (you really don't think that GIB makes determinisitc decisions?)

[finally17]

Even if GIB were completely deterministic:

At the very least you assume that GIB responds at an equal level to all bidding styles, an assumption I highly doubt is valid.

Then, you'd have to assume that GIB responds equally appropriately to all defensive play issues.

Basically, anything where my choices can affect the choices GIB makes, you'd need uniform "quality" of decision making across variations in the input the user gives to really say that you're removing all elements except the players. I have no clue how you would define that.

That said, it could still be fun to have the tournaments, I just don't think they'd mean all that.

[gwnn]

These tourneys would ideally* determine the Player with Best Abilities Against GIBS, not the Best Bridge Player.


*=if the same boards are being played then contestants might communicate to one another and thus gaining unfair advantages.

[hantveit]

gwnn, on Mar 10 2008, 09:09 AM, said:

These tourneys would ideally* determine the Player with Best Abilities Against GIBS, not the Best Bridge Player.


*=if the same boards are being played then contestants might communicate to one another and thus gaining unfair advantages.

It is very easy to lock out communication between players.

Yes, you find the best one to play with the GIB. But this is much better then the GIB tournaments they have today where luck with cards are involved also.

[uday]

Quote

It is very easy to lock out communication between players

It is easy to lock out communication via BBO but it is impossible to lock out communication via instant messenger, email , telephone, etc.

[matmat]

Sounds terrible.

[hantveit]

hrothgar, on Mar 10 2008, 08:42 AM, said:

There's a hell of a lot of other changes that you'd need to make...

At the most basic level, you'd need to synchronize all the random number generators that the various GIBs use (you really don't think that GIB makes determinisitc decisions?)

Hi,

You do not have to do many changes. GIB can still play as it does.

The only thing you need to do is to generate is the hands and distribute them to all the tables.

It is close enough :-)

[hrothgar]

hantveit, on Mar 12 2008, 03:53 PM, said:

hrothgar, on Mar 10 2008, 08:42 AM, said:

There's a hell of a lot of other changes that you'd need to make...

At the most basic level, you'd need to synchronize all the random number generators that the various GIBs use (you really don't think that GIB makes deterministic decisions?)

Hi,

You do not have to do many changes. GIB can still play as it does.

The only thing you need to do is to generate is the hands and distribute them to all the tables.

It is close enough :-)

You don't have the foggiest clue how GIB works, do you?

Do you even know what the word deterministic means?

[uday]

I don't know if a duplicate-gib tourney would be a test of skill vs a test of something else, but i think it rates to be as interesting than the current style of bot tourney (which uses different hands at each table, and total point scoring )

U

[TimG]

uday, on Mar 12 2008, 08:37 AM, said:

I don't know if a duplicate-gib tourney would be a test of skill vs a test of something else, but i think it rates to be as interesting than the current style of bot tourney (which uses different hands at each table, and total point scoring )

U

Wow, I just assumed everyone was playing the same deals...I guess this explains some of those crazy results.

[barmar]

TimG, on Mar 12 2008, 10:40 AM, said:

Wow, I just assumed everyone was playing the same deals...I guess this explains some of those crazy results.

This is the whole reason why cheating is impossible in MBT. If the hands were duplicated, you could collude with a friend. One of you would play each hand normally, and when he's finished he would tell the other one what all 4 hands were, and then he could bid and play the hand double-dummy. The second player would be almost guaranteed to win the event, and the two of you would split the winnings.

The proposed new format could be OK if it were just played for fun, like the MBC. But it would not be appropriate as a replacement for MBT, since prize money probably attracts cheaters.

You can play with GIB partner and opponents in the MBC. If there were a rule that the human player always has to sit South, we'd effectively have this type of competition.

[hantveit]

uday, on Mar 12 2008, 08:37 AM, said:

I don't know if a duplicate-gib tourney would be a test of skill vs a test of something else, but i think it rates to be as interesting than the current style of bot tourney (which uses different hands at each table, and total point scoring )

U

Yes, the problem when we are playing different cards, is that you can get a minus result after playing a perfect tourney. It is not fair that the cards should decide whom of the players has the higest chance of winning.

In fact, I do not know of any tournament in the world elsewhere, where the players in a tournament dos not play the same cards...

[hantveit]

hrothgar, on Mar 10 2008, 08:42 AM, said:

There's a hell of a lot of other changes that you'd need to make...

At the most basic level, you'd need to synchronize all the random number generators that the various GIBs use (you really don't think that GIB makes determinisitc decisions?)

I understand,

Let us all play the same cards then, that change is at least easy to make...

[helene_t]

finally17, on Mar 10 2008, 02:52 PM, said:

At the very least you assume that GIB responds at an equal level to all bidding styles, an assumption I highly doubt is valid.

GIB has one style and everyone would have to adjust himself to that.

If you want a cheat-proof GIB tourney without the luck from getting good cards, just let each contestant play his own team match with 7 robots. Of course you could still have the luck of being faced with relatively many deals of the kind that humans handle better than bots, and some contestant will get more swingy deals than others. But this should even out much faster than the current format.

[hantveit]

gwnn, on Mar 10 2008, 09:09 AM, said:

These tourneys would ideally* determine the Player with Best Abilities Against GIBS, not the Best Bridge Player.


*=if the same boards are being played then contestants might communicate to one another and thus gaining unfair advantages.

Yes, but it is difficult to clone people. And I will argue that the best bridge player wins. An expert bridge player take into account who he/she playes with and against, their strengths and weaknesses, and then they adapt to this.

So the best bridgeplayer, is likely to also play best with the GIB. At least if we assume that the "best one" gets a little bit of practice first...

[barmar]

hantveit, on Mar 14 2008, 08:28 AM, said:

Yes, the problem when we are playing different cards, is that you can get a minus result after playing a perfect tourney. It is not fair that the cards should decide whom of the players has the higest chance of winning.

In fact, I do not know of any tournament in the world elsewhere, where the players in a tournament dos not play the same cards...

While the problem you describe can happen in any particular tourney, luck should cancel out in the long run (half the time the bots will get the slam hands, the other half you'll get them), and your skill should take over.

Don't think of MBT/RR as being like duplicate bridge. They're more like rubber bridge. A good player might lose a particular rubber because his opponents got the good cards, but after a few dozen rubbers I think the winnings would be closely correlated to player skill. And the same thing is true in MBT/RR -- you just have to play frequently (no, Fred is not paying me to say this ).

[Rain]

I think it's possible to lock out collusion if there's a timer for every play (not board). 20 seconds per bid to start, then 5 seconds for each bid.
20 seconds per play to start, then 5 seconds for each play decision? Of course some people may be annoyed, some decisions take longer, but that's the only time allowed, so all boards change at the same time. Nobody has more time than the next, so nobody has more information during the course of tourney.

Whether each GIB does the same thing....can probably set it at a setting where there's a high chance of making identical decisions at every table.

Players who are used to more time at different decisions may get annoyed initially. But ultimately it is fair because everyone gets the same time allowance?

-----------------
When I saw this thread, I was thinking more of something I really like, and I've mentioned it to a few people. Sorry to hijack, but too lazy to form my own thread.

I want team tourneys ! Official ones.

Even if it's not 1 team against the next. I mean, MBT in team format, you know? Combined scores count, eliminate the lowest score, this kind of thing. Gives us something(someone) apart from GIB to cuss at.

[TylerE]

Ewwwwwwwwww. I would absolutely refuse to play in such an event. That's not bridge, or anything even close to it. If you want a game that doesn't give proper thinking time, play blitz chess or something.

[hantveit]

barmar, on Mar 12 2008, 03:27 PM, said:

TimG, on Mar 12 2008, 10:40 AM, said:

Wow, I just assumed everyone was playing the same deals...I guess this explains some of those crazy results.

This is the whole reason why cheating is impossible in MBT. If the hands were duplicated, you could collude with a friend. One of you would play each hand normally, and when he's finished he would tell the other one what all 4 hands were, and then he could bid and play the hand double-dummy. The second player would be almost guaranteed to win the event, and the two of you would split the winnings.

The proposed new format could be OK if it were just played for fun, like the MBC. But it would not be appropriate as a replacement for MBT, since prize money probably attracts cheaters.

You can play with GIB partner and opponents in the MBC. If there were a rule that the human player always has to sit South, we'd effectively have this type of competition.

I do not understand this view. Yes, it is possible to cheat. But there are money tournaments played today with human partners and opps that play the same cards. People love to play these tournaments even if it is possible to cheat.

SO - let the players decide themselves.

1. Clearly post on the tournaments today that you are NOT playing the same cards.
2. Make a Gib tournament where we all sit hence north and we all play the same cards.

Let the voice of the poeple decide and see what the players prefer.