[benellis58]

It probably worked out well that the GIBBO robot PASSED after I opened 1D and his RHO passed, because East also passed and I made 7 tricks for plus 70 and a score of 90.38% on the board. The only NS score that was better was plus 100 for beating East's 3C contract by one trick after South opened 1NT rather than 1D.

Despite the decent result, however, I think North's more normal action should have been to respond 1H instead of passing. Note that I am NOT resulting - quite the contrary (!) - since if North HAD responded 1H, we might easily have had a worse score than we did after his decision to pass.

https://www.bridgeba...CD6%7Cmc%7C7%7C

[benellis58]

A tale of two hands, two CONSECUTIVE hands, with one played right after the other. Watch the lack of consistency displayed by the GIBBO robot sitting North:

On the first hand, NS are red against white. They have an uninterrupted auction, as EW pass throughout. North deals and passes. South opens 1H. North bids 1S. South bids 2S. Now North, with K653, 105, 103, AK753, bids 3C, defined as "Game try suit". South rejects the invitation by signing off in 3S, after which North...raises to 4S! (Why did he even bother issuing a game try if he was subsequently going to overrule pard's decision and bid a game himself anyway?)

On the second hand, vulnerability is reversed, as this time NS are white against red. They again have an uninterrupted auction, as EW again pass throughout. This time South deals and opens 1C. North bids 1H. South bids 2H. Now North, with 542, 10964, AKQ10, K4, bids 2S, defined as "Game try suit". South rejects the invitation by signing off in 3H, after which North...PASSES...THIS time. Okay, this time he made a game try (just as he did in the first hand) but this time he respected his partner's rejection and passed (UNLIKE in the first hand).

Note the very amusing and ILLOGICAL bidding choices by North: In the first hand (where he BIZARRELY and INSULTINGLY made a game try and then OVERRULED his partner's decision to stop in a partial), he had "only" 10 HCP, a semi-flat 4-2-2-5 shape, and a fairly weak trump suit of K653, yet he bid ON! In the second hand, he had TWELVE HCP, a flattish 3-4-4-2 shape, and a fairly weak trump suit of 10964, yet he...made the (normal) decision to PASS after his partner rejected his invitation. It might be said that he bid on with the weaker of the two hands. And...why would he bid on in any case after his partner spurned BOTH game tries on BOTH hands? If he wanted to be in game on either or both, he should have bid it directly, without going through the charade of inviting. But once he DID choose to invite, he should have respected pard's decision. Results are irrelevant, as it is North's bidding "philosophy" that is the issue.

Also, one more key issue about GIBBO game try bidding: In both cases, North's bids were defined as "Game try suit", yet when he bid 3C, he had VERY STRONG clubs himself (AK753), yet when he bid 2S, he had VERY WEAK spades himself (542). Should there not be some consistency in the logic of the suit with which he makes a game try?

[benellis58]

Lots of observations and lots of criticism of ALL THREE GIBBO robots on just this ONE hand!

The GIBBO robot sitting East creates a sequence inviting 3NT and the GIBBO robot sitting West accepts. As a result, they reach a very poor 3NT contract. Looking only at East's hand, might he envision a strong enough West hand and a favourable enough layout where 3NT would be a GOOD contract that would probably make? Yes, he might...but the odds are probably highly against it, which is why I think that East's NORMAL action (especially at matchpoints, which is what this game was!) would be to pass. I think East got what he deserved.

Note also that the definition for East's 2NT call says "9 HCP", while he has only eight, and a fairly lousy eight at that.

North (shades of GIB!!) leads his shortest and weakest suit (spades).

The GIBBO robot sitting West and declaring wins the spade lead in hand and then at trick two leads a... SPADE to dummy so that he can lead a diamond to his...DEUCE. WHY is he IMMEDIATELY burning his entries, wiping out his own communication, AND potentially helping to knock out his OWN spade stoppers and potentially (although not here, due to the actual layout) set up spade winners for the OPPONENTS? NONE of his plays to the first three tricks make sense. He could have won trick one in DUMMY and then led the diamond at trick two.

North wins the diamond at trick three, and then - as the GIB and GIBBO robots perversely LOVE to do, immediately plays a second diamond, the very suit DECLARER just played. WHY do they persist with this imbecilic habit, which more often than not turns out poorly for them? (Here I'm speaking in GENERAL rather than specifically for this hand.) North's diamond king holds and he then plays...ANOTHER diamond!

Later, North wins a heart at trick eight and plays a club at trick nine...but LOOK at the club that he FOOLISHLY chooses to play: His remaining clubs at that point (since he had earlier pitched the five) were 1094...and he ridiculously led the NINE. WHY, pray tell? Was he TRYING to mislead his partner?

The poor 3NT contract went two down, but the real point of this post is to expose the many and varied sins of ALL THREE GIBBO robots on this one SINGLE hand!

https://www.bridgeba...HK%7Cpc%7CC6%7C

[benellis58]

The GIBBO robot sitting North defends perfectly here - perfectly BAD, that is. The incompetent fool wins trick one and instead of making the easy, normal, obvious, successful play of a second diamond, he shows the world his striking , total, and monumental incompetence by stupidly and pointlessly cashing his heart ace and then...and THEN (!) playing a CLUB (!) of all things! If they ever erect a Mount Rushmore of stunningly stupid defensive plays, this GIBBO atrocity should be among the FIRST examples showcased there. Their defensive "abilities" are KNOWN to be severely lacking, but THIS is SO horrendous that it's bad EVEN by GIBBO defensive "standards".

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

[benellis58]

Broken record time: Yet ANOTHER hand where I ask "What's going on HERE? Did a GIB robot somehow sneak into the West seat and push aside the GIBBO robot who was supposed to be sitting there?" Check out his lead against my 3NT.

And while you're at it, check out North's decision to never mention his SEVEN-card club suit on a hand with a 1-4-1-7 shape! No, I'm NOT crying or complaining, as I (along with 21 other human Souths) scored 78.30% on the board for plus 660, with only one NS pair doing better (for plus 1370 in 6C), and yes, I AM aware that my 1NT opener had "only" 14 HCP and a 2-2-6-3 shape.

https://www.bridgeba...SA%7Cpc%7CD9%7C

[benellis58]

Why do the GIB and GIBBO robots LOVE to lead trumps...including STIFF trumps...including STIFF HONOUR trumps? No, it usually does NOT work out well for them.

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

[benellis58]

Three hearts? Three hearts? THREE...HEARTS!!! Never mind that the GIBBO robot's bid is truly insane. Just focus on the fact that it (not surprisingly!) does not even match his own GIB definition of "3+ hearts; 5+ spades; 8+ HCP; 8- total points".

As a bonus, note that the definition also has a flaw that appears in many (TOO many!) GIB definitions, as I have often pointed out in the past: HCP can be less than or equal to "total points", but they CANNOT be greater than them, yet this very poorly written definition falsely implies the reverse, since it falsely claims that North is showing at LEAST 8 HCP and possibly more while at the same time showing at MOST 8 "total" points and possibly fewer. This is patently incorrect, and both the definition and North's ludicrously outrageous 3H bid are not exactly advertisements for the quality of the GIB and GIBBO robots!

https://www.bridgeba...H7%7Cpc%7CH8%7C

[benellis58]

Trick three: Declarer South leads a club, which the GIBBO robot sitting East wins.

Trick four: The GIBBO robot sitting East...immediately plays...another club!

No, it does NOT work out well for East-West!

Will these GIB and GIBBO robots ever learn that it's usually not wise to return the suit DECLARER was playing?

https://www.bridgeba...C8%7Cmc%7C11%7C

[benellis58]

The result was fine, but that was QUITE an aggressive vulnerable 3D call by the GIBBO robot sitting North.

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

[benellis58]

A diamond lead? Why a diamond lead? It's the suit that South opened, and on the auction South is known to hold at least four diamonds.

Sure, looking at only West's hand, "any" lead might turn out "right" or "wrong" depending on the random layout of this random hand, but if he's going to lead a four-bagger, why not try the one that the opponents have NOT bid and have NOT shown at least a certain amount of length in?

https://www.bridgeba...CJ%7Cpc%7CC5%7C

[benellis58]

Although GIBBO robots are far better at leads than the horrid GIB robots were, they still have their perverse love for trump leads. Here is yet another hand where the robot leads a (stiff!) trump. Not surprisingly, it is ALSO yet another hand where it works out poorly for him.

To quote Pete Seeger from "Where Have All the Flowers Gone", "When will they ever learn, when will they EVER learn?".

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

[benellis58]

Not my table, but I'm posting this hand to expose the astoundingly bad defence by the GIBBO robot sitting West.

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

[benellis58]

Fairly useless GIB definition of the double of 4C:

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

[benellis58]

Besides their silly love of trump leads, the GIBBO robots also have a twisted passion for leading doubletons, and of COURSE they absolutely HATE leading the suit their partner bid. So on this hand, West of COURSE wouldn't lead a CLUB, the suit his PARTNER opened, because he MUCH preferred leading his worthless doubleton diamond. Not surprisingly, it cost him a trick, as declarer could now later pitch his losing club on an ESTABLISHED diamond.

Now, on a DIFFERENT random layout, a diamond (or anything else) COULD be the "winning" lead...but probably more often than not, it would NOT be. The REAL issue, though, is that the robots would likely be far better off if they followed long-established principles such as tending to lead pard's suit rather than just swinging out wildly with random leads.

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

[benellis58]

Another BBO player sent me the hand linked below, which was from a "Just Declare" game with a mandated auction. He asked "Why does South bid 5D and not 5H?"

Yes, why DOES the recommended GIBBO auction prefer bidding a MINOR to a MAJOR and a FOUR-CARD SUIT to a FIVE-CARD SUIT? The main reason I can think of is that the GIBBO robots are atrocious bidders incapable of logical thought.

The BBO player who sent me the hand gave me permission to post it here, although I would have preferred it if he had posted it here himself. In any case, I thank him for contributing to the immense library of GIB and GIBBO flaws.

https://www.bridgeba...C9%7Cpc%7CSA%7C

[benellis58]

The same player mentioned above also sent me a second hand. Here he asked "Why does East give away the diamond position by pitching his stiff five?"

Indeed! HERE the main reason I can think of is that the GIBBO robots are atrocious defenders incapable of logical thought. Well, that and the fact that they are VERY nice and friendly, as evidenced by the fact that they SO often do their absolute best to REMOVE any guesses that declarer might have. They LOVE to help DECLARER. Such NICE "opponents"!

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

[benellis58]

First three GIB definitions:

1D begins with "Minor suit opening". Are those three words necessary?

1H begins with "One over one". Are THOSE three words necessary?

1S begins with the statement "5+ spades". Are those words accurate and truthful? No, they are NOT. Yes, on this hand, it was I (the human) who bid 1S on "only" four, and yes, a 1S overcall USUALLY does show at least five spades...BUT I have seen the GIB and GIBBO robots overcall on "only" a four-card suit on numerous occasions. Thus, the definition is INDEED inaccurate and untruthful. It SHOULD say something such as "Tends to show at least five cards in the suit, but CAN sometimes be done with 'only' four".

https://www.bridgeba...DA%7Cpc%7CC8%7C

[benellis58]

I could mention a few things about the GIBBO defensive plays on this hand, but I'll just point out the MOST obvious error:

At trick 6, West leads the king of diamonds from AK109. East, with QJ2, plays the...DEUCE. West then cashes his king (East following with the queen) and plays a third round (the 9) won perforce by East's now-stiff jack. West still has the high 10 left, but cannot cash it, as EW have BLOCKED the suit. Declarer South takes ALL the remaining tricks.

Had East correctly played the diamond QUEEN at trick 6, the defenders could easily have taken all FOUR of their natural diamond tricks. Either West could underlead his remaining A109, which East would win with his jack and return a diamond to West's remaining A10...OR even if West cashed his diamond ace on the second round, East could follow with the jack, thereby UNBLOCKING the suit and allowing West to cash his 10 and 9.

In other words, all roads SHOULD have led to Rome!

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

[benellis58]

The GIBBO robot sitting East wins his club king at trick 5. At trick 6, he immediately does what they foolishly LOVE to do: he returns a...CLUB, the very suit that DECLARER just played.

Then at trick 7, declarer leads dummy's 10 of diamonds from its remaining J10 doubleton, and East with Q6 doubleton remaining, COVERS with his queen. In practice, this was irrelevant since declarer South would have slid the 10 had East not covered, but on general principles it was clearly wrong for East to cover.

https://www.bridgeba...H8%7Cmc%7C10%7C

[benellis58]

If I had guessed better, I could have made 10 tricks on this hand, rather than the mere 9 that I took. Thanks to my very kindhearted opponents (the GIBBO robots sitting West and East), however, my score on the board was 100 % anyway. Why? Because they DOUBLED me in THREE spades!

But, hey, we've all sometimes doubled contracts that made, so THAT is not why I'm writing about this hand. I'm writing about it because...

West's double of 3S...in the PASSOUT seat...was defined as "4+ hearts; 10+ HCP; biddable spades".

"10+ HCP"? He had FIVE HCP, exactly HALF of his promised MINIMUM!

"Biddable spades"? He had...JACK-FIVE DOUBLETON! Do GIB and GIBBO consider that BIDDABLE???

The robots will never be competent if they can't even adhere to their OWN system and definitions.

https://www.bridgeba...C9%7Cpc%7CH5%7C