Down 3, goodbye tournament
#1
Posted 2024-August-30, 15:40
#2
Posted 2024-August-30, 16:06
East's lead of the T is either precisely T3 doubleton, or any other combination containing the 9. Everything else being equal, there are considerably more of the latter than the former, so it sees it as completely clearcut at MPs.
I guess the human logic is that West would have ducked with other combinations, but GIB doesn't consider what ifs like that.
Of course, humans would have led a low club, making this moot at other tables, but GIB also assumes other tables are GIB.
#3
Posted 2024-August-30, 18:07
Why is the tournament set up to let robots declare the hand when there is a human available to play that hand. IMO, the purpose of a tournament is to test the bidding and play of the humans, not the robots whose play should be mostly identical.
#4
Posted 2024-August-31, 06:26
johnu, on 2024-August-30, 18:07, said:
Why is the tournament set up to let robots declare the hand when there is a human available to play that hand. IMO, the purpose of a tournament is to test the bidding and play of the humans, not the robots whose play should be mostly identical.
The format of the tournament is MP pairs, with human players free to partner another human of their choice or a robot.
The tournament is set up to allow the declarer to play, whether human or robot. Which follows the Laws of bridge and is considered quite normal by the players (no robot has complained either).
#5
Posted 2024-August-31, 06:43
smerriman, on 2024-August-30, 16:06, said:
East's lead of the T is either precisely T3 doubleton, or any other combination containing the 9. Everything else being equal, there are considerably more of the latter than the former, so it sees it as completely clearcut at MPs.
I guess the human logic is that West would have ducked with other combinations, but GIB doesn't consider what ifs like that.
Not just the fact that West did not duck, but surely everything else is NOT equal? If the lead was from T3 then playing the 7 will be a MP disaster, as indeed it was. You have to consider the gravity of consequences, not just the frequency.
#6
Posted 2024-August-31, 09:28
pescetom, on 2024-August-31, 06:26, said:
The tournament is set up to allow the declarer to play, whether human or robot. Which follows the Laws of bridge and is considered quite normal by the players (no robot has complained either).
Which law covers robots?
#7
Posted 2024-August-31, 11:05
jillybean, on 2024-August-31, 09:28, said:
No law currently. What the law does cover is which player plays the contract, namely the player who for that side first bid the denomination of the final contract (see Definitions and 41a). No obvious reason why that should change once the laws cover robots specifically, either.
#8
Posted 2024-August-31, 13:24
pescetom, on 2024-August-31, 06:43, said:
Not following - if the lead was from T3 you score 0%, but if it was T9x3, you score 100% don't you? *If* the latter were a slight favourite, which is our conditional, isn't that a better MP play than a guaranteed 50%?
I guess it depends on your position in the tournament to date.
#9
Posted 2024-August-31, 14:35
smerriman, on 2024-August-31, 13:24, said:
I guess it depends on your position in the tournament to date.
Partly the latter (if you are hoping to win, and I was close), but also if it was T9x2 I do not expect anywhere near 100%... this is not the US and half the field will be in 2♠, even if not there is leeway for level of declarer play in the remaining tricks and robot is not the best (although above average) in this field.
#10
Posted 2024-August-31, 15:12
#11
Posted 2024-August-31, 19:52
pescetom, on 2024-August-31, 06:26, said:
IIRC, when BBO first started robot tournaments, the robots always declared the hands. Later, human declare tournaments were offered as an option, which became a lot more popular, even though the robots probably played better than a lot of the human players. That's probably because humans have selective memories and quickly forget when the robot declarer played the hands without incident, but the hands where the robot completely misplayed in a manner that no human would really left a mark.
As for the Laws of Bridge, they don't contemplate having robots being part of a table. I stand by my belief that tournaments are designed to test who the best human players are, not whether a robot is a better player than a human.
#12
Posted 2024-September-01, 06:28
As does the tournament organizer.
#15
Posted 2024-September-03, 18:22