[nullve]

From yesterday's Zenith Daylong Reward (MP):

---

Score: 92.6 %

---

Score: 100 %

---

Score: 96.4 %

[pilowsky]

Very impressive.Clearly, you've been taking lessons from me.
With a little work, you can make no tricks at all and score 200%.
Feel free to deposit funds into my BBO account.

[LBengtsson]

4nt bid like 'insider trading' lol. BIG bug in robots software

[pigpenz]

doesnt matter if best hand or not the bots can be abused
Personally there should be a way that a player can be barred for capricious bidding.

though most people dont look at other results. A recorder button where an operator
could look at the board in question and make a ruling on it.

[thepossum]

Do people really boast about psyching out a dumb bot
Rather sad

EDIT I realise the word psych is totally inappropriate for something with no cognition at all. What is the appropriate word?

[nullve]

thepossum, on 2021-March-10, 01:58, said:

Do people really boast about psyching out a dumb bot
Rather sad

Did I boast? Ok, maybe a little.

But my main purpose in posting this was to make others (including the GiB programmers) aware of this egregious bug.

thepossum, on 2021-March-10, 01:58, said:

EDIT I realise the word psych is totally inappropriate for something with no cognition at all. What is the appropriate word?

Non-native English speaker here, but maybe 'game' as in "game the robots"?

[pilowsky]

thepossum, on 2021-March-10, 01:58, said:

Do people really boast about psyching out a dumb bot
Rather sad

EDIT I realise the word psych is totally inappropriate for something with no cognition at all. What is the appropriate word?

Why not have a bit of a boast and gloat? What would the world be without gloaters? http://bit.ly/NoGloaters

The palpable contempt that many Forum members have for Bridge played with robots is reasonable and inaccurate at the same time.

It's reasonable because Bridge played against robots is not the same as the game played against three other people.
It's inaccurate because both games require many of the same skills.

By playing with and against robots, I am learning a great deal about many fundamental elements of bidding and card play.
In 'psych-speak', there is an obvious 'positive transfer' of skills acquired in one form of the game to the other form.

Bridge at its most basic can be (IMHO) visualised as a combination of attempting to solve the four-colour map theorem (as defined by a mathematician called Guthrie - any relation?) combined with integer number theory.
Layered on top of this are a variety of rules and regulations designed to make the game difficult and interesting.
It ends up as a form of doubles tennis with four different coloured balls of different sizes at the same time, but with less exercise (most of the time).
As opposed to cricket, a game where, as Bill Bryson famously commented "the spectators get more exercise than the players".

All the same, robot Bridge is a completely different game because it is a pure video game where each competitor attempts to outwit the other players using their knowledge of how the program works.

I don't think it makes it less interesting, just different.
A big advantage of robot Bridge is that you can boast about upsetting the opponents or rail against your partner because they will not take offence.

Another big advantage of robot Bridge is that if you discover a cool technique that works (some per cent of the time) against the robots I feel it is entirely appropriate to share it with the rest of us so that we can also try it out and enjoy the results - or complain when we stuff it up.
By contrast, in 'people Bridge' I find that the degree of 'sharing' of useful information can be somewhat constipated - except on this Forum where everyone is generally very helpful, and not boastful at all.

[pigpenz]

eventually the bugs get worked out but slowly.....about 9 yrs ago the bug in the play was if you had a 2 way finnesee for a Q
GiB would always cover a honor so there was no guess, until they remedied that.

[thepossum]

pilowsky, on 2021-March-10, 02:58, said:

Why not have a bit of a boast and gloat? What would the world be without gloaters? http://bit.ly/NoGloaters

The palpable contempt that many Forum members have for Bridge played with robots is reasonable and inaccurate at the same time.

I agree with your sentiments and usually enjoy competing against the other players, all of us sharing the same bot and its limitations. What I like to boast about is if I made a non psyche bid and beat my opponents who didn't quite find my bid

Being someone with a bit of research and statistical analysis under my belt I often feel the tourneys round here are seriously lacking in much needed variance

[pilowsky]

thepossum, on 2021-March-10, 20:43, said:

I agree with your sentiments and usually enjoy competing against the other players, all of us sharing the same bot and its limitations. What I like to boast about is if I made a non psyche bid and beat my opponents who didn't quite find my bid

Being someone with a bit of research and statistical analysis under my belt I often feel the tourneys round here are seriously lacking in much needed variance

Although I am not a card-carrying statistician (as my mentor would have said) I do know a little more than the "average bear". And I'm not even all that keen on porridge.
I just played a hand in a Daylong where a slight difference (variance?) in play by our friend the North robot dramatically affected the result.
I'll post it shortly when the tournament ends.