BBO Discussion Forums: Welcome back Lorserker - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Welcome back Lorserker

#1 User is offline   pescetom 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,880
  • Joined: 2014-February-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 2026-June-11, 14:29

Good to see you back again :)

Could you please explain what is going on here in the first four tricks? :angry:
All human opponents managed +2 or +3.
As always, it would be nice to know how many "costly" simulations we got for our money at each decision (and if they were substituted by AI then why it played for this split and whether true GiB would have done the same).
I paid for "Advanced" GIBBO even if the description says "Robot" :unsure:
0

#2 User is offline   lorserker 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Staff
  • Posts: 166
  • Joined: 2007-November-26
  • Gender:Male

Posted Yesterday, 09:28

i think the plan is to cash a to heart, cross back to south, then finesse in hearts.
finessing hearts is slightly suboptimal, but it's not silly.
what is silly is to think that it will be obvious what is the best way to come back to south (diamond ace or finesse). simulation assumes that you will get it right, but then reality hits. you start low, see the jack, and then don't know what to do. seeing the jack makes it very unlikely that the finesse is the way to go (only correct against exactly KJ. KJx(x) is not possible as it would not play the jack) playing the DA is reasonable because single J is quite possible and then you lose another trick to a ruff.

it seems like trick by trick, good or almost good plays were made.

of course best would have been to recognize that it's better to cash two top hearts and then go after the diamonds without fear.
robots are a bit clumsy planning with a guess in the future

#3 User is offline   pescetom 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,880
  • Joined: 2014-February-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted Yesterday, 12:28

Thanks, but as you point out, it was slightly dumb (plus decidedly anti-field) not to cash hearts K in absence of information to suggest the finesse and decidedly dumb to tackle the diamonds before sorting out hearts if the finesse was favoured for some reason (how many simulations?).
Was it not one of your objectives in the GIBBO modifications to make play in well known situations more like that of human opponents?
Can I take it for granted that this was indeed Advanced GIBBO despite the "Robot" description?
0

#4 User is offline   dsharpcctx 

  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 13
  • Joined: 2022-December-25

Posted Yesterday, 22:14

I put the hands on another computer bridge program. I had the computer play the hands two times - once computer bid and the other time with given bidding. Both times the computer cashed the ace and king of hearts. Admittedly, on one simulation, the computer did not take the diamond finesse either.
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users