[MrAce]

http://tinyurl.com/yca24dz4

Check the last 3 tricks of the play!

They are hopeless.

[manudude03]

Well, I have sympathy for West. If you really started with 3+ clubs as promised, then the winning defense is to unblock. It would make East's defense somewhat strange, but they don't check if the previous play was logical.

[wbartley]

manudude03, on 2017-July-23, 15:35, said:

Well, I have sympathy for West. If you really started with 3+ clubs as promised, then the winning defense is to unblock. It would make East's defense somewhat strange, but they don't check if the previous play was logical.

There is no logical reason to play the K of spades. South must hold the J of spades since East played the queen at trick one and also failed to beat the ten of spades. This is just basic card play.

[MrAce]

manudude03, on 2017-July-23, 15:35, said:

Well, I have sympathy for West. If you really started with 3+ clubs as promised, then the winning defense is to unblock. It would make East's defense somewhat strange, but they don't check if the previous play was logical.

I can't have 3 clubs, W saw me with 4 hearts + 3 spades and if I have 3 clubs then I would have at most 3 diamonds then E would cash another diamond. So this goes to those who claim nonsense in BW such as "GIB never miscounts, never misses a spot" type of BS. This also assumes E did not win my ♠T with J. There is nothing that makes the play by W reasonable in any way, shape or form.

This also goes for those who think I am whining about bad score. I actually scored % 100 on this one. I would rather prefer getting 0% and play with a bot that actually can count to 5 and defeat my 3 NT.

[nige1]

Agree with manudude03. Gib doesn't know which evidence to believe. The result is more due to Mr Ace's cunning psyche than due to Gib's stupidity.

[MrAce]

nige1, on 2017-July-23, 16:25, said:

Agree with manudude03. The result is more due to Mr Aces cunning psyche than due to Gib's stupidity.

Comments like this makes me have sympathy for the GIB since I can not really tell whether these comments or the play by GIB is worse!

[nige1]

MrAce, on 2017-July-23, 16:28, said:

Comments like this makes me have sympathy for the GIB since I can not really tell whether these comments or the play by GIB is worse!

I accept Mr Ace's criticism. I confess that I often play much worse than Gib

Poor Gib trusts all evidence equally. It "stupidly" believed Mr Ace's 1♣ opening bid. Hence declarer was marked wth ♣Kx in the 3-card ending. So LHO Gib "sensibly" ignored possible false-cards, and unblocked ♠s, in a vain attempt to cash the remaining tricks.

[manudude03]

wbartley, on 2017-July-23, 16:18, said:

There is no logical reason to play the K of spades. South must hold the J of spades since East played the queen at trick one and also failed to beat the ten of spades. This is just basic card play.

manudude03, on 2017-July-23, 15:35, said:

It would make East's defense somewhat strange, but they don't check if the previous play was logical.

As I was saying....

[johnu]

MrAce, on 2017-July-23, 16:21, said:

I can't have 3 clubs, W saw me with 4 hearts + 3 spades and if I have 3 clubs then I would have at most 3 diamonds then E would cash another diamond. So this goes to those who claim nonsense in BW such as "GIB never miscounts, never misses a spot" type of BS. This also assumes E did not win my ♠T with J. There is nothing that makes the play by W reasonable in any way, shape or form.

Another reason South can't have 3 clubs (from East point of view) is that West followed on the ♣A and pitched a club on a high diamond. South can't have 3 clubs there are 14 clubs in the deck.

I'm still trying to figure out GIB's signals. I thought GIB would play ♣9 from 3 as count. Is ♣J just a random card from equals and not count?

East should cash ♣K before playing a spade.

[steve2005]

wbartley, on 2017-July-23, 16:18, said:

There is no logical reason to play the K of spades. South must hold the J of spades since East played the queen at trick one and also failed to beat the ten of spades. This is just basic card play.

Apparently does not make this inference.
If Gib followed certain rules on playing of cards, then Gib could place declarer with J♠/ Without Gib runs a simulation and is assuming declarer does not have this card.
In the documentation it says Gib plays random cards with equivalent doubletons.
It also appears Gib plays random cards on other occasions.

[The_Badger]

Not just LOL, but ROFL (I said to myself I wouldn't comment on Robot hands - as we all know full well that GIB has 'idiosyncrasies' - but I have commented on three in as many days.)

[nige1]

Perhaps GIB programmers should treat "information" from calls by humans as unreliable.

[wbartley]

steve2005, on 2017-July-23, 23:07, said:

Apparently does not make this inference.
If Gib followed certain rules on playing of cards, then Gib could place declarer with J♠/ Without Gib runs a simulation and is assuming declarer does not have this card.
In the documentation it says Gib plays random cards with equivalent doubletons.
It also appears Gib plays random cards on other occasions.

When playing third hand high it's just plain wrong to play the Q from QJ. GIB does not play randomly from equivalent cards in this situation. If GIB doesn't take its partner's queen of spades as absolutely denying the jack (thus placing it in declarer's hand) then it's just awful.