[benellis58]

Of note: West's questionable pass as dealer; my "only with robots" opening of 1NT; West's choice of TWO clubs rather than a higher level - ESPECIALLY since 2C did NOT specifically show CLUBS; North's decision to bid 3C, transferring to diamonds, when he COULD have doubled 2C to invoke Stayman; my taking my life in my hands by bidding three HEARTS over pard's 3C (after which, based on my experience with GIBBO robots, it would have not surprised me if North continued bidding diamonds until doomsday).

After we ended up in 4H, let's be kind, generous, and charitable to our GIBBO robot friends, and simply say that they did not exactly find a textbook perfect defence:

https://www.bridgeba...C7%7Cmc%7C12%7C

[benellis58]

Not my table, but an auction that shows some of the utter absurdity of the GIBBO system, the GIB definitions, and the bidding "skills" (ahem!) of the GIBBO robots:

West, North, and East are all GIBBO robots. North begins the nonsense by PASSING his partner South's opening bid of 1H. I would not expect any competent human player to pass with his hand.

East balances with 2C in passout seat, South doubles for takeout, West passes, and North bids 2D. Fair enough. But now East passes, the human South chooses to bid 2H, West passes, and...

North, with 1062, 74, AJ873, 1063, now...bids...three...CLUBS! Perhaps you are thinking, as I was, "What kind of world-class ***** would bid 3C with this hand?" I looked at the definition of 3C to see if there was ANY reason for such lunacy, and I saw: "4+ diamonds, 2+ hearts, 5 HCP; 6+ total points; forcing to 3NT". So, there it was: the answer! The world-class ***** bid 3C because he is playing a system that goes beyond world-class idiocy. MAYBE bidding 3C should show - oh, I don't know - how about CLUBS???!!! Why the HELL should the bid be defined as it is? And if he has "2_ hearts"...two PLUS (!), mind you, with NO upper limit on HOW many hearts he has, why did he PASS at his first opportunity, and why is he now bidding three clubs rather than either passing 2H or raising hearts...by bidding...HEARTS? Also, how is it that this call requires him to have EXACTLY 5 HCP? GIB definitions are frequently useless because their point ranges are frequently so wide and vague (such as 11-21, for example), yet HERE, on this bizarre sequence, the HCP are PINPOINTED at exactly five? Then it says "6+ total points". Where did THIS come from? Answer: It came randomly, as SO many GIB statements about "total" points do! Also, if he actually HAS "6+" (six PLUS - with NO upper limit!) total points, then why the Hell did he PASS his partner's opening 1H bid? (Well, we know the answer to that one: He passed 1H because he has no clue about how to bid.) Also, please note that he does NOT have "6+ total points" that the ludicrous definition promises. The entire thing is a bad joke.

The human South, perhaps bewildered by the bizarre auction and laughable definition of 3C, and probably aware that he is playing with a partner who is likely worse than even the worst human bridge player he has ever seen, bids 3NT. The North robot...pulls it to 4H. Why? Does he think that he can ruff the fourth round of a black suit in his dummy, which has a mere TWO...LITTLE hearts? Or did he suddenly realize that he bid clubs on 1063?

NS actually LUCK into a decent contract and the human South takes 10 tricks for a fine score of 95.97 %, so kudos to the human, but this is an example of how EVEN when a robot gets to a good contract, it is often because he STUMBLED into it virtually by accident after recklessly driving into several trees on the way to it. Hopeless system, pathetic definitions, incompetent robots.

https://www.bridgeba...DA%7Cpc%7CS4%7C

[benellis58]

What's that you say? You'd like to see an example of an incredibly stupid lead by a GIBBO robot? Okay, I'll be glad to oblige:

West SEES his partner East double 5D...and THEN West leads the...five of...HEARTS (!) from Q65! Why on Earth would any bridge player with even a LICK of common sense lead from a queen-empty-third suit (which is often a VERY dangerous lead, as among many other things, it can easily destroy a partnership's "guaranteed" trick in the suit if partner has JXXX, JXX, JX, or even stiff J, lacking the 10) AFTER partner has (VAINLY!) tried to GUIDE the opening leader by wisely making a lead-directing double?

West's lead is remarkably stupid in principle, and in practice it got the incompetent GIBBO robot what he deserved. As always, one random hand proves nothing, but on THIS random hand, West's choice was the only lead allowing declarer to take 12 tricks. Note that West also slapped his partner East in the face by NOT leading a DIAMOND as his partner East had wisely and accurately requested. This is the type of pure unadulterated nonsense, stupidity, and above all disrespect that would justifiably end many human partnerships. The poor GIBBO robots, however, are cursed to continue playing together.

https://www.bridgeba...C9%7Cmc%7C12%7C

[benellis58]

This ONE hand contains MANY of the ridiculous things that make GIBBO robots such abjectly hopeless players: pathetic GIB definitions, mind-blowingly stupid GIBBO leads, stunningly bad "defending", wasteful squandering of honours, and ingrained nonsensical habits.

Definitions:

1D: "Minor suit opening - 3+ diamonds; 11-21 HCP; 12- 22 total points". Is it REALLY necessary to state "Minor suit opening"? And where in Hell does "12-22 total points" come from? Answer: from nowhere in terms of logic. The GIB definitions often purely randomly add one point to the lower level and one point to the higher level of the stated HCP to arrive at the COMPLETELY UNSCIENTIFIC statement of "total" points. Utterly useless.

1S: "One over one - 4+ spades; 6+ total points". Is it REALLY necessary to state "One over one"?

2C: "Opener two rebid - 4+ clubs; 4+ diamonds; 3- spades; 11-16 HCP; 12-18 total points". Is it REALLY necessary to begin with (the POORLY-worded) "Opener two rebid"? Also, "11-16 HCP" is patently INCORRECT. South actually has SEVENTEEN HCP and his bid is CORRECT. His hand is not suitable for a reverse, as he has EQUAL length in his long suits, and it is not "good" enough for a jump shift. AND...as usual the statement about "total" points has been pulled out of thin air for no logical reason whatsoever. This is a classically pathetic GIB definition.

2D: "Correct back - 2+ diamonds; 4+ spades; 6-9 total points". Is it REALLY necessary to state "Correct back"? And the bit about "total" points is, as usual, without any logical reason...in addition to being broad and vague.

2H: "4+ clubs; 4+ diamonds; 4+ hearts; 3- spades; 16- HCP; 14-18 total points". Pure drivel! Let's do some math: If South has, as the definition reasonably says, four or more cards in clubs...AND diamonds...AND hearts, then guess what: That means he has at LEAST 12 cards (and possibly even 13) in those three suits combined. That means that he has at MOST one spade (and possibly even none), so defining the call as "3- spades" is completely incorrect, as it SHOULD say "ONE or ZERO spades". What is the excuse for saying "THREE minus spades"? Is it pure laziness and sloppiness, or is it a TOTAL lack of knowledge of basic arithmetic? Also, this definition repeats the INCORRECT lie that the bid shows "16- HCP", and once again the statement about "total" points has been pulled out of thin air for no apparent reason.

2NT: "Invitational to 3NT game - 2+ diamonds; 4+ spades; 9+ HCP; 9- total points". Is it REALLY necessary to included the word "game"? Does GIB think that its users are so ignorant that they are unaware that 3NT is "game", or does GIB just ENJOY insulting and annoying its users? Also, as I've often mentioned, HCP can be less than or equal to "total" points, but they CANNOT be greater than "total" points, yet here, as is often the case with the typically horrendous GIB definitions, the reverse is INCORRECTLY suggested, since it says that the HCP are at LEAST nine, with NO upper limit, while it says that "total" points are at MOST nine, with NO lower limit! Totally false, totally wrong, and totally hopeless!

3NT: "4+ clubs; 4+ diamonds; 4-5 hearts; 3- spades; 16 HCP; 18- total points". Amazingly, it gets even WORSE here! "Four to FIVE hearts"???!!! If he had FIVE hearts, wouldn't he have OPENED one...HEART? And it repeats the mathematically ignorant inaccuracy about "3- spades". It also INCORRECTLY (and for Lord knows what reason) says that he has exactly 16 HCP, and as usual pulls "total" points out of thin air - all the more so, since the contract is now in NO TRUMP. Astoundingly bad, even by GIB's "standards", which are already the lowest of the low when it comes to definitions.

Lead:

Yes, leads can be tough, can often be merely guesses, and their success or failure can often depend on luck or random layouts, but East's lead of the SEVEN of spades...from KQ107...INTO the spade bidder...is ridiculous and gets what it deserves when dummy's STIFF NINE wins the trick.

"Defence":

At trick two, West wins his jack of hearts. At trick three, he naively and stupidly does what the GIBBO robots naively and stupidly LOVE to do: He immediately plays...another HEART, the very suit that DECLARER just played. This is one of their numerous inexplicable and totally illogical defensive "habits". It makes no sense, and it almost always works to their detriment, but they persist with it because they are incapable of logical thought. They perversely LOVE to return DECLARER'S suit and equally perversely HATE to return PARTNER'S suit. Hopeless, hopeless, hopeless!

At trick six, declarer South leads the club 5 towards dummy North's A102 and the GIBBO robot sitting West foolishly plays his JACK from J976, GUARANTEEING four club tricks for declarer without declarer even having to correctly guess the club layout (by inserting dummy's 10 if West correctly...and NORMALLY played a low club rather than needlessly and stupidly tossing his jack on the table). The GIB robots, who were SO wretched that they were even worse than the new and improved GIBBO robots, used to frequently make the almost always insane plays of second hand high and third hand low, but that particular piece of lunacy has presumably been corrected for GIBBO (thank Heaven!), yet - for some unknown reason - it once again reared its ugly head on this hand - on this pathetic travesty of a "defence" by the GIBBO robots.

Not surprisingly, NS collected ALL the matchpoints on this board, while the GIBBO robots who "defended" scored a very well-deserved ZERO.

Note that ALL of the above nonsense was present in this ONE SINGLE HAND, and that gives you an idea of the absolute and sadly longstanding decay in the GIBBO system, definition, and cardplay.

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

[benellis58]

A question that I seem to be asking far too often, given the recent upgrade to GIBBO: Did a GIB robot somehow push the GIBBO robot out of his chair? I ask because West made the terminally stupid lead of his STIFF 3 of hearts INTO declarer South, even AFTER South had shown four or five hearts. I always expected this type of monumental incompetence from the GIB robots because they were so utterly dismal, but after Lorserker's upgrade, the new and improved GIBBO robots usually avoid the insane leads that were so beloved by their woefully ignorant predecessors.

At trick four, East wins his spade ace. What does he play to trick five? Well, incompetent fool that he is, he of COURSE plays another spade, following the usual (and usually ridiculous) GIBBO habit of immediately returning DECLARER'S suit. West wins his king, and...of COURSE, since he has the same (BAD!) habit, returns yet ANOTHER spade. Is GIBBO defensive play to be laughed at...or pitied? Well, maybe both.

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

[benellis58]

Of course, it's not only the EW GIBBO robots who have no clue. North is from the same family, so he also plays bridge about as "well" as an extinct dinosaur.

Here he leads his jack of hearts from J8 doubleton against West's 2S. Perhaps he's looking for a THIRD-round heart ruff with his...STIFF (!!!) 7 of spades???!!!

Yes, leads involve guesswork and luck, yada, yada, yada, and yes on many hands "anything" might turn out right or wrong, but these robots sadly include doubletons in their list of (bad) preferred leads (along with trumps and along with leading DECLARER'S suit). Leading a doubleton jack or queen CAN, of course, sometimes work out well, but it often COSTS, as it is very easy for it to DESTROY an otherwise "guaranteed" trick in the suit on the partnership's combined assets. And here, given that North had only a STIFF trump, the lead rated to GAIN only if he was lucky enough to find his partner South with very good hearts. So, regardless of result, and looking ONLY at North's hand, it was a questionable lead.

Having said that, however, he didn't really have (from his perspective) a GOOD lead. His stiff trump would probably be worse than the heart that he chose. On the auction, he knew that declarer West had spades and a minor, and he wouldn't want to lead into declarer's minor, so perhaps that gave some justification to his heart lead. Given that he had SIX diamonds, though, it was likely that declarer's minor was clubs, so a diamond lead might have been North's best choice looking only at his own hand. In any case, the heart lead did not cost a trick, but it also gained nothing, and it was unlucky for the robot that hearts happened to be declarer's ACTUAL side (6-3) fit.

My REAL complaint about North on this hand happened a few tricks later. At trick four, he won his club queen and...immediately returned a CLUB, the suit DECLARER had just played. I don't care about what happened on this particular random hand (where we happened to score an average 51 %), and his club return probably cost nothing anyway (given the heart situation) but I DO care that he, like his equally foolish NS brethren in the posts immediately above, adheres to the ludicrously bad habit of immediately returning DECLARER'S suit - something that should be presumed to be wrong most of the time even without seeing ANY cards!

https://www.bridgeba...CS6%7Cmc%7C9%7C

[benellis58]

Here's one of countless examples showcasing how ineptly, wastefully, and vaguely constructed the GIBBO system is.

Over North's 2H (and East's pass), here are THREE definitions for three possible calls by South:

2S is defined as "3+ spades; 10-12 total points".

3S is defined as "3+ spades; 10-11 total points".

Note that the two definitions are almost IDENTICAL, with the ONLY difference being that 2S has an upper limit of 12 and 3S an upper limit of 11 - HARDLY a significant difference! And yet the pathetic GIB system has TWO calls for what is essentially the SAME hand. This WASTES one of the calls which otherwise COULD be used for a USEFUL purpose.

Also, isn't it comical that TWO spades has a HIGHER upper limit (albeit wastefully and needlessly) than THREE spades?

Meanwhile, the third possible call for South over 2H is 3C, which is defined as "3+ spades; 12+ HCP; 13+ total points; forcing to 3NT". Okay, at least it's a BIT different than 2S and 3S, but the unacceptable VAGUENESS of GIB definitions is illustrated later, because North's final call on this auction is 3S, which supposedly shows "17- HCP and 12-19 total points", while South's final call is 4S, which supposedly shows "12+ HCP and 13-18 total points". Note that from the perspective of EACH partner, their combined assets might be as few as TWELVE HCP (since North's defined "17-" literally means zero to 17)...OR...as many as 35 (!). That is QUITE a range! How are they supposed to intelligently know what to do when playing a system that has such broad and vague parameters? Similarly, according to those same two definitions, their combined partnership assets could be as few as 25 "total" points...OR...as many as 37 (!)!

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

[benellis58]

East-West actually lead AND return spades, and thereby take the first four tricks against South's INT. Bravo! Well done, gentlemen!

But then, at trick five, they revert to the type of "defending" that (sigh!) we have sadly come to EXPECT from GIBBO robots. Having won trick four, East now plays a...DIAMOND. Why on Earth, looking only at his hand and dummy North, would any COMPETENT player ever return a DIAMOND at this point rather than a heart? You don't have to see all four hands to come to the obvious conclusion that WHATEVER the remaining layout happens to be, a HEART is the NORMAL play and will probably also be the BEST play almost all of the time (as it indeed would have been here, on THIS random layout).

And not only did the GIBBO robot sitting East make the abnormal, illogical, poorly reasoned, and glaringly ineffective return of a diamond, but he didn't even play the CORRECT diamond. A chimpanzee would have had a 50-50 chance of choosing the correct diamond, but the dimwitted GIBBO robot, who SUPPOSEDLY is an "intelligent" bridge player (ha, HA, HA!) as per what the acronym "GIB" stands for (!), leads the FOUR of diamonds from 64 doubleton. Is it any wonder that these GIBBO robots are so hopelessly inept at defending, given that they seem to stupidly play all spot cards as interchangeable equals?

Their defensive "prowess" (ha, HA, HA!) earned them a score of 3.85 % on this board, while NS waltzed home with an easy 96.15 %. It's great to have these GIBBO simpletons "defending" AGAINST you, but it's definitely NOT great when one of them is "defending" WITH (ha, HA, HA!) you!



https://www.bridgeba...HQ%7Cpc%7CH9%7C

[benellis58]

Just a quick word of praise for TARIK: His thread "ROBOTS ARE AWFUL" has perhaps the most accurate title ever written.

[benellis58]

West, North, and East are all GIBBO robots. North's 3NT bid was hugely successful...but that does NOT mean that it was a good bid. It seems like quite a gamble bidding 3NT with those North cards, considering that the auction has marked South with ELEVEN black cards.

https://www.bridgeba...H5%7Cpc%7CDJ%7C

[benellis58]

Why do these GIBBO robots HATE leading partner's suit? Here, East stupidly leads a diamond for no reason, despite his partner's 2C overcall. On THIS random hand, the robot's idiocy allows declarer to take 12 tricks despite having two "guaranteed" losers with the club ace and the offside king of spades.

Sure, on some OTHER random hand, the diamond lead might not cost, and once in a blue moon the diamond lead might turn out best...but this ridiculous aversion to leading pard's suit makes no sense in principle and is one of the countless reasons that the GIBBO robots are such disgustingly poor defenders.

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

[benellis58]

Remarkably stupid play of the diamond queen at trick four by the GIBBO robot sitting East. But hey, what else is new?

https://www.bridgeba...CD8%7Cmc%7C9%7C

[benellis58]

Here we go again: Yet another stupid lead by the GIBBO robot sitting East. His partner bid one DIAMOND, so of COURSE the clueless robot DOESN'T lead his PARTNER'S suit...(or even a spade from his sequence). Instead he makes one of his FAVOURITE leads: a worthless doubleton (in this case the 4 of clubs from 42). Hopeless as always.

https://www.bridgeba...S4%7Cmc%7C11%7C

[benellis58]

South's 3S bid is defined as "forcing". WHY, pray tell? SURELY it should be invitational. If he definitely wanted to be in 4S without even requiring partner's input, he could simply BID 4S rather than 3S, and if he wanted to force, he could simply begin with 3C rather than 3S. He NEEDS a way to make a natural invitation, and 3S is that way...except, apparently, in the stupendously hopeless bidding system of the GIBBO universe. NS got to the normal 4S, made it, and scored 96.67 % on the board - but with NO thanks to the wretched GIB definition of 3S.

https://www.bridgeba...S4%7Cmc%7C10%7C

[benellis58]

I play with and against GIBBO robots just about every day, and every time I play I am reminded of how incredibly bad they are at all facets of bridge. They are staggeringly, stupendously bad. As I have mentioned on multiple occasions, I have never in my life seen even a single human bridge player as totally incompetent as the GIBBO robots. The worst human player I ever encountered was not just better, but far better than the GIBBO robots...but the really amusing thing is that as horrendous as the GIBBO robots are, they are still a LOT better than the even more execrable GIB robots were. Now THAT is funny! I just thought I'd mention that for posterity.

[benellis58]

You might not agree with my 1D opening (in fact, you probably won't), but I always use this style with less than a reverse, because I like to have a prepared auction. Yes, it sometimes bombs, but in my experience it works out well more often than it works out poorly. That should be evident to anyone reading this, because if it failed more than it succeeded I would obviously discontinue the strategy.

The real point of this post, though, is to bash the robot sitting North. Yes, he heard me open 1D...but he also heard me bid 2C, so I think it's foolish for him to bid 2NT (!) with FIVE clubs to the queen, a stiff diamond, and two aces in the majors. Looking only at his hand, we might make 3NT, but if so, there's a good chance we'll also make five...six...or even seven clubs. He has a massive hand in support of clubs. From his perspective, I could be conceivably be PASSING his invitational 2NT...and we could STILL be cold for a game or even a slam in clubs.

In practice, 3NT had no play on a diamond lead (which, to be fair, was probably QUITE unexpected, given that I had OPENED 1D), while SIX clubs was cold. We scored 39.3 % on the board, which was a pleasant surprise for a hand with such a shabby result, but we could have scored 100 % and I would still be saying that his 2NT call was extremely ill-judged.

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/2p8wv4ty

[benellis58]

Ridiculous 2D bid by the GIBBO robot sitting East. He got what he deserved.

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/ypmd25bk

[benellis58]

12 tricks were always available, since the ace of clubs was in front of the king, so the lead didn't matter, but it was still an example of what horrible leaders AND partners the GIBBO robots are. East had doubled 3C, TRYING to help his partner, and begging for a club lead. West had NO reason to lead anything else, but ignored his partner's advice and led a led a spade. Even though it didn't cost on THIS hand (and, of course, it didn't gain either!), it's a bad policy and it's the type of behaviour that could justifiably cause the doubler to ABANDON the partnership in "real" bridge with human players. For the hopeless GIBBO robots, though, this is typical behaviour, because they also HATE to lead their partner's suit and they LOVE to lead DECLARER'S. This lack of logic is just one of the many reasons that the GIBBO robots are so inept at bridge.

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/bdew3b5e

[benellis58]

North, West, and East are all GIBBO robots. This hand was a shared top (shared with SEVERAL other pairs) that scored 71.43 %, so I'm not complaining about that OR about the bridge result (whether good or bad) on this random hand, but I am complaining (sigh, for about the ten thousandth time?) about the hideous GIBBO system, the reprehensible GIB definitions, and the horrendous bidding of the GIBBO robots.

This hand showcases yet another of the many bad habits that the robots have. They seem to love staying quiet during the auction for a while and then suddenly emerging with a ludicrous reverse or cue bid that gets their partnership too high for absolutely no reason. Pathetic.

After passing at his first two turns to bid, North decides that over West's 3H call, he MUST now CUE BID 3S merely because his partner South opened 1D and competed with 3D over the enemy 2H. North has 7632, Q104, 1083, KQ5. His 3S cue bid is defined (poorly, as usual!) as "2+ diamonds; 9-11 HCP; 10-12 total points; forcing", which is pretty useless. Instead of NEEDLESSLY saying "forcing" (do they REALLY think we're going to PASS 3S, the suit that West OVERCALLED in?), maybe they should be telling us something useful. Maybe a cue bid should actually MEAN something!

And, as SO often happens, note that North does not even adhere to his own GIB definition. Bad as the definition is, at least he should be "obeying" it, and if not, then maybe the definition should be changed!

"2+ diamonds"? Who CARES? Maybe "3+" or "4+" would make more sense. "9-11 HCP"? He has...SEVEN...a full two fewer than his "promised" MINIMUM, and a full FOUR fewer than his potential maximum. What the Hell is the point of having a definition (whether good or bad) if it's not being followed? If it's a GOOD definition, then FOLLOW it! If it's a BAD definition, then change the definition! Instead, time after time we see silly, poorly written definitions...that often aren't even followed.

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

[benellis58]

I actually don't object to North's bidding here, but I am VERY surprised by it, because I have never seen the robots pull this stunt before. Historically with such a hand, they have either passed 1NT or (if they did bid Stayman) bid 2NT over pard's 2D response.

https://www.bridgeba...C4%7Cmc%7C10%7C