[MrAce]

Hi Fred, Uday and BBO staff.

I am a frequent GIB tourney player. And as far as I know the number of people who plays GIB events is increasing. This is a good thing.
As you can check this forum, I am not a "GIB complainer" Which means I do not come here and cry or whine for every move or bid GIB makes which does not fit in my personal "right things to do" list. And we all appreciate that you guys are doing your best to improve the GIB to make it more satisfying for the expectations of players. And there had been some improvements that I like, such as not having to play 5-2 m fit after I open 1 NT and GIB xfering to a minor with 5332 hands and so on.

But recently something went wrong and went wrong badly imo, in the process of improving GIB. First I thought it was just another bug to be fixed. I recently saw;

• GIB overcalling with 1 hcp, not even a weak jump overcall, it overcalled 1♠ with a T high suit and did not even have a wild shape.
• Frequently, alerts that explains the bid of GIB turning out to be totally wrong. Especially doubles made by GIB saying that 2+ card in the doubled suit. Happened 2 times and both times GIB had void in that suit.
• 2 times, when I made a T/O double over RHO 1m opening, GIB responds a simple 1 level suit, and when I tried to bid 1 NT with 19 hcp, it shows my bid as 11-14

I started to use, finally, web version of BBO about a year ago I believe. And the problems like the ones I listed and I am sure others have experienced different problems/bugs are OK up to a point. As long as they are not frequent incidents. However, particularly after last 2 or 3 updates, things have gotten worse. Not only regarding the frequency, but also regarding the scale of absurdity.

---

I don't know what others think, but I'd rather play with GIB which transfer to 5 card minor after my 1 NT opening than with the GIB which makes absurd things like I listed above or bids like the one below and which started to do these things frequently.

Would you please check the last 2-3 updates if it has anything to do with it, or these were just bugs which already existed and I started encountering them coincidentally after those updates.

Thanks

Timo

EDIT: Oh well, I got kicked out of tourney due to time while I was typing this in forums

[lycier]

A great pity that it got very very bad contract.
Is it not so strong enough to reverse twice in this minimum hand?
Never !
Who is to blame?
My answer is the current Gib bidding system.


I have been playing with/against Gib many many hands,I have found that it seems that Gib always open longest suit - whatever it is major or minor,whatever it is Max or Mini.
So I have to say opening 1♦ mistakenly shows its defect of the current Gib bidding system.


P.S.

 lycier, on 2015-April-17, 08:27, said:

---

Obviously opening 1♣ is very incorrect.
I think only opening 1♦ is correct even wth 5-card ♦ and 6-card ♣ in this minmum hand.
When in the minimum,opening suit depends on quality of suits,not length of suit:
♦ suit is :AKQ54 = decent suit,so it should be opening suit.

♣ suit is : JT7543 = close to bust suit,bad suit,so it should be not opening suit.

It is a best option for opener to open 1♦ first,then bid 2♣,other option is worse,isn't it?
I think that opening 1♣ mistakenly shows its defect of the current Gib bidding system.

[MrAce]

I was not complaining about the choice of opening bid. It's about the continuation.

[cloa513]

 MrAce, on 2015-April-22, 21:35, said:

I was not complaining about the choice of opening bid. It's about the continuation.

Its the opening that traps it into this absurd sequence though it did strongly hint about its unusual hand by bidding hearts twice and you ignored the message. It can't do a reverse 2H and it tends to consider the HP before the hand shape.

[MrAce]

 cloa513, on 2015-April-22, 22:39, said:

Its the opening that traps it into this absurd sequence though it did strongly hint about its unusual hand by bidding hearts twice and you ignored the message. It can't do a reverse 2H and it tends to consider the HP before the hand shape.

Did you ever hear about 2♦ rebid ?

I did. In fact it is the only bid if one opens 1♦ with this. But first time in 35 years I saw a 1 NT rebid with a 6-5.

I would open 1♥ myself, in other example by Lycier I would open 1♦. But we are neither discussing about GIB's opening choice, nor in a debate whether we should rebid a 6 card bad suit or not.

Yes, opening the higher rank 5 card suit, with a crappy 6 card suit is better. But I can live with that and still enjoy my game. Rebidding 1 NT with 6-5 is absurd. Suggesting that I should have expected a 6-5 hand from a 1 NT rebid is even worse. Oh btw mr genius, what help would it do to me to know that it shows 6-5, even if it did? What move was left available for me to avoid disaster?

If i bid 2 NT over 2♥ it shows this as invitation. was I supposed to invite opener with 15 hcp?

[1eyedjack]

It is I think only very recently that GIB will entertain the possibility of rebidding 1NT on anything more distributional than as would qualify for a 1NT opener. A change which in principle I applaud. Bugs sometimes happen in areas where change is made. It should not surprise or upset us. We just report them and get them fixed. And only get upset if they are still there a year later.

[iandayre]

I think 1H is the best opening bid with this hand, but I fully agree that if you do open 1D, 2D is as good as anything. A 1NT rebid is utterly bizarre. That said the correct contract could have been reached after 4H if S finds the obvious 5D call instead of the pointless actual choice of 4S.

And call me a "whiner" if you like, but I see very little evidence that BBO is doing its best to improve GIB and to make the playing experience better for the customers. Certainly Uday, Georgi and others do their best, but I suspect that GIB takes up only a small portion of their job duties. They address some problems with the updates, and continue to ignore others. Overall the bid explanations of anything but the most basic auctions are terrible, a major overhaul is needed, but clearly BBO is unwilling to dedicate the necessary resources to the problem.

So until that happens I'll be here whining incessantly. Enjoy.

[uday]

 iandayre, on 2015-April-23, 13:05, said:

So until that happens I'll be here whining incessantly. Enjoy.

We do appreciate the "whining" since this is one way we find glitches. Also the "robot reports" and the various emails and bbo mails. Not so much the reports that say "look at tourney 57 board 3" that don't include a link.

We address some issues and (for a while) ignore others. The space that needs attention is huge.

We give gib constant attention, and while one of us is fiddling with the rules, another helps define the desired behaviour. Sometimes I get involved if the problem seems to need me, and sometimes I drag Fred and others into analyzing hands.

Is there a silver bullet for GIB, or any robot? I highly doubt it. I think we have to grind thru this stuff as we've been doing, not that we're not always on the lookout for that bullet.

[jdonn]

The particular bug of the 1NT rebid is corrected in the next release. However, much as I know you were trying to be productive with your post, it does no good to say "and this time GIB overcalled with nothing, and this other time GIB explained a bid wrong, and this other time etc etc." If anything happens that you think is a bug or needs correcting, send in a bug report. Every single bug report is addressed within a day or two. Every single one. That doesn't mean they are all fixed immediately, but I assure you they are all viewed and considered.

Regarding a few other ancillary issues:
- GIB probably "should" open the higher suit with 5-6 touching suits and a minimum hand, but I wouldn't consider opening the longest suit to be a "bug". I can promise you that on any hand where GIB doesn't open it's longest suit, there will be complaints, even if such an action would seem obvious to most of us. However, it's something to consider for the future.
- It's true that sometime when corrections or upgrades are made, they have unforeseen effects that manifest in the following version of GIB. However, to the best of my knowledge (which on this particular topic is more than most), it is nothing more than a myth most of the time that people say "after the last update or two GIB got way way worse, this is ridiculous!" Please, please make complaints only if they include specifics. What exactly has GIB started doing since a recent upgrade that it wasn't doing before? If there is such a thing, it will be fixed. If you can't think of a specific way to answer, consider whether you are just voicing frustrations about a recent action or two, or whether it might be either a coincidence or imagined.
- I do not agree with Uday that anyone appreciates the "whining". The complaints about specific hands and bugs, absolutely are appreciated. Even throw in your sarcastic comments about the 'crack programming team', as many people do, if it makes you feel better. But Uday responded to a comment that said essentially "I don't see improvement fast enough for my liking, so based on nothing but my random suspicions and guesses about how many resources are being devoted to GIB and in what ways, I will whine about GIB forever. Enjoy everybody!" That is utterly unproductive. Take it from me that more resources are devoted to GIB than you "suspect". If issues are ignored, it's because they are prioritized to work on other issues first. If you have a complaint based on FACT then you have every right to make it. But if you have a complaint based on NOTHING, as apparently you do, then no one cares. Especially given how transparent and involved BBO is with responding to complaints about GIB, such as Uday responding in this thread.

Thanks everyone for the specific bug reports with links to the specific hand. Those will continue to be addressed.

[iandayre]

 jdonn, on 2015-April-25, 11:09, said:

The particular bug of the 1NT rebid is corrected in the next release. However, much as I know you were trying to be productive with your post, it does no good to say "and this time GIB overcalled with nothing, and this other time GIB explained a bid wrong, and this other time etc etc." If anything happens that you think is a bug or needs correcting, send in a bug report. Every single bug report is addressed within a day or two. Every single one. That doesn't mean they are all fixed immediately, but I assure you they are all viewed and considered.

Regarding a few other ancillary issues:
- GIB probably "should" open the higher suit with 5-6 touching suits and a minimum hand, but I wouldn't consider opening the longest suit to be a "bug". I can promise you that on any hand where GIB doesn't open it's longest suit, there will be complaints, even if such an action would seem obvious to most of us. However, it's something to consider for the future.
- It's true that sometime when corrections or upgrades are made, they have unforeseen effects that manifest in the following version of GIB. However, to the best of my knowledge (which on this particular topic is more than most), it is nothing more than a myth most of the time that people say "after the last update or two GIB got way way worse, this is ridiculous!" Please, please make complaints only if they include specifics. What exactly has GIB started doing since a recent upgrade that it wasn't doing before? If there is such a thing, it will be fixed. If you can't think of a specific way to answer, consider whether you are just voicing frustrations about a recent action or two, or whether it might be either a coincidence or imagined.
- I do not agree with Uday that anyone appreciates the "whining". The complaints about specific hands and bugs, absolutely are appreciated. Even throw in your sarcastic comments about the 'crack programming team', as many people do, if it makes you feel better. But Uday responded to a comment that said essentially "I don't see improvement fast enough for my liking, so based on nothing but my random suspicions and guesses about how many resources are being devoted to GIB and in what ways, I will whine about GIB forever. Enjoy everybody!" That is utterly unproductive. Take it from me that more resources are devoted to GIB than you "suspect". If issues are ignored, it's because they are prioritized to work on other issues first. If you have a complaint based on FACT then you have every right to make it. But if you have a complaint based on NOTHING, as apparently you do, then no one cares. Especially given how transparent and involved BBO is with responding to complaints about GIB, such as Uday responding in this thread.

Thanks everyone for the specific bug reports with links to the specific hand. Those will continue to be addressed.

JDonn

Your accusations against me are unfounded. I do not make generalized complaints, I invariably point out specific issues with specific examples from actual hands, or at least I respond to those posted by others. Obviously I don't know all the specifics of how BBO prioritizes the improvements to GIB, but I do know that it is far from Uday's only job. I also praised him for his efforts, and I agree that snarky comments are unproductive.

It is a clear consensus here that GIB does not need new conventions or treatments, it needs improvement in how existing ones are utilized. And I'll repeat again, the bid explanations (beyond the most basic auctions) are deeply flawed and need a lot of work, and I have seen very little improvement in the 16 months that I have been playing robot tournaments regularly.

But, that said, thank you for making your comment. I hope we get your thoughts again. And I'll say again, if GIB didn't have potential and some strong points, I would not still be here playing and commenting.

[MrAce]

 jdonn, on 2015-April-25, 11:09, said:

The particular bug of the 1NT rebid is corrected in the next release. However, much as I know you were trying to be productive with your post, it does no good to say "and this time GIB overcalled with nothing, and this other time GIB explained a bid wrong, and this other time etc etc." If anything happens that you think is a bug or needs correcting, send in a bug report. Every single bug report is addressed within a day or two. Every single one. That doesn't mean they are all fixed immediately, but I assure you they are all viewed and considered.......

Hi Josh

Tbh I did not know that it was not good enough as Uday and you pointed out, to provide tourney # and the board # and my BBO name. How do I provide a link? Do i open a page in "my hand records" click on the hand that I want to report and copy and paste the url? Or is there any other way to do it? Regardless from now on I will do it. It was not due to my ignorance, though, but if you noticed as a frequent GIB customer in all these years, this was my first or 2nd complain in these very forums. I wanted to state that GIB overcalled with nothing (I remember well that it has 1 hcp overcall and 7222 shape but i am not as sure as the hcp about shape tbh, it was at 1 level, not even a preempt, i know that) just to make a point that these type of extremely unusual incidents + them happening much more frequently than before led me to a conclusion that there went something wrong with the recent updates.

Here I go, Diana helped me out how to do it.

http://tinyurl.com/myv8kp3

This just happened in last 10 mins or so. I just immediately withdrawn from another GIB event. This has been my most frequent thing to do in GIB tourneys lately. Withdrawn. I will say it again, GIB was ok to play with, despite its odd to human logic and eye bidding and play. But it is not playable now the way it is (I am talking about the explanation of bids and the hand it actually holds being the opposite) This I am very sure started after last 3-4 or so updates. I will keep on reporting this bug in this topic, in the format you and Uday prefers.

On this hand, GIB could have chosen a forcing 3♦ bid, or 3 NT via lebensohl showing stoppers in ♥ suit. GIB chose to make a penalty double, despite the explanation.

Josh, I know you play GIB too, I am guessing so does Uday. Imo, GIB tourneys are one the best services BBO provided to the consumer end, if not the best. As I wrote in other forums other than BBF I love it. I am not a kind of person who gives a damn whether bridge is played f2f, holding real cards by your hand or toes or your teeth or simply not holding them but looking at them on my monitor in the comfort of my own house. It allows me to play and compete with other fellow players with same pd, same hands and direction, against same defense or declarer play. It is also very cheap. I had to pay 8$ per a club event for 24 boards. With 8$ i can play 256 boards in BBO, against much better opponents than average club player and compete vs very famous players like yourself, Justin, Uday or whoever. I really love it. I believe, rightly or wrongly, that it improves my game as well. I am aware it crates some bad habits as well but a decent player can easily recognize and protect himself from these.

Bottom line is, as you predicted, I am not really here to whine and cry or bash anyone. Although I may have sounded like one. In fact I really appreciate anyone who tries to improve GIB, despite what I wrote earlier in this or another GIB topic that whoever is making those should be stopped immediately at all costs, due to my frustration and I apologize for that. I have no clue how programming works. I am guessing and hoping that there will be bad things that an update may cause and you guys call it a bug and that you will eventually fix them. And I am guessing that there is no such thing in programing, that one can predict everything that can go wrong with % 100 accuracy, before they actually execute it and see how it runs.

[MrAce]

http://www.bridgebas...CSA%7Cmc%7C9%7C

That's also new, GIB plays canape nowadays!

[Bbradley62]

 MrAce, on 2015-May-01, 13:24, said:

On this hand, GIB could have chosen a forcing 3♦ bid, or 3 NT via lebensohl showing stoppers in ♥ suit. GIB chose to make a penalty double, despite the explanation.

GIB's odd doubling over 1N-(2x) was recently addressed here:
http://www.bridgebas...__1#entry842407

[MrAce]

http://tinyurl.com/kmvwr37


This is what I am talking about when saying GIB doing things that i never saw before. See the explanation for 4♠ and the actions GIB takes.

[1eyedjack]

 MrAce, on 2015-May-24, 05:48, said:

http://tinyurl.com/kmvwr37


This is what I am talking about when saying GIB doing things that i never saw before. See the explanation for 4♠ and the actions GIB takes.

---

The rot starts to set in with North's second double, showing biddable diamonds when he has a void. Can't say that I am enamoured of the first double, but at least it is within the bounds of the explanation. What was your intention behind 4D bid, by the way?

Incidentally we are supposed to devote hands to dedicated threads.

[Bbradley62]

 1eyedjack, on 2015-May-24, 06:09, said:

Incidentally we are supposed to devote hands to dedicated threads.

The theme of this thread is that OP thinks that GIB has been doing some bizarre things as a result of the last couple of new releases of GIB, and that those recent releases need to be thoroughly re-checked for issues. He has posted this hand (and others) to bolster that claim.

[MrAce]

 1eyedjack, on 2015-May-24, 06:09, said:

What was your intention behind 4D bid, by the way?

Incidentally we are supposed to devote hands to dedicated threads.

What other forcing bid do I have vs an explained 17-21 hcp held by pd? I am aware that I play best hand tourney and it can't have more than 14 hcp but still. How will I ever find if we have heart fit or not without taking the risk that it can be passed by GIB? 3♥? 4♥? GIB will leave me in hearts even with 2 of them and stiff spades. 1273 for example. But regardless, how can it possibly bid 4♠ with stiff when it was explained 4+ spades?


And look at the explanation of dbl over 3♦ as you said. Biddable diamonds!

Look at the explanation of 3♣ bid. This is hell of a 3♦ bid and not even remotely a mixed raise.

I have a feeling they may be trying to make gib use distributional values. And GIB, from the explanation of W bidding and N bidding, uses those shortness and/or length as values. But when it adds values coming from shape and uses as if they are real hcps, instead of making preempt it uses as if the hand has 7-9 hcps, and the N gib sees the diamond void and spade stiff as values and bidding them or doubling them as if they are hcp values.

Or maybe none of those, they changed the meaning of some bids but forgot to enter explanations fully in some positions. Or they did change the explanations as well, but GIB won't cooperate in some positions. I am just saying what goes thru mind of a computer dumb.