Join Bridge Winners
Bot Programming Perhaps Last Time

I posted several times about BBO bot programming with terms like 'sobriety' or 'substance' linked to the original bot programmer for extra emphasis. That has met with responses of the Programmers' Fraternity how difficult is to program, how humanity at large is in debt to code writers, etc. Here I provide two other examples which perhaps more clearly indicate that there could be benefit in pressuring  BBO to hire this time a well qualified programmer(s) with the supervision of perhaps lesser programmers but actual bridge players. Note that after recent merger, the cost per unit of revenue has gone down.

Unfortunately, I haven't saved my best example of clear programming incompetence. In this example bot held some cards in a suit nobody else held and 7xx in another suit. Reduced to the three-card ending, bot kept only 7x which exposed the other bot to a squeeze. The second hand below is somehow similar in terms of faulty logic: at the 11th trick E. Bot is confused and makes a play that can't win, no matter how strongly it believes my 1N can't contain a singleton, which is similar in spirit to a belief that seven is too low a card to matter.   

Robot
853
J732
A64
962
Robot
KJ97
K9
QJ105
A84
Robot
A1064
Q654
973
J5
Fuzzyquack
Q2
A108
K82
KQ1073
W
N
E
S
1
P
3NT
P
P
P
D
1
3NT South
NS: 0 EW: 0
3
9
10
Q
3
1
0
K
A
5
3
0
1
1
3
K
6
8
1
2
1
8
5
Q
2
3
3
1
3
9
A
J
1
4
1
4
4
K
6
3
5
1
10
2
7
5
3
6
1
7
7
J
9
3
7
1
8
6
Q
7
1
8
1
J
4
2
4
1
9
1
10
6
2
8
1
10
1
9
Q
A
J
3
11
1
10
5
K
A
3
12
1
N/S +490
13

 

Robot
A10974
AQ10
5
Q1086
Robot
J
653
QJ987
9743
Robot
653
KJ82
104
AJ52
Fuzzyquack
KQ82
974
AK632
K
W
N
E
S
P
P
1NT
P
P
P
D
5
1NT South
NS: 0 EW: 0
10
J
3
2
1
1
0
Q
10
2
5
1
2
0
J
4
3
7
1
3
0
9
5
6
8
1
4
0
7
8
K
10
3
5
0
A
4
8
6
3
6
0
K
A
3
5
0
6
1
9
5
2
Q
3
7
1
8
10
6
2
3
8
1
7
A
3
K
0
8
2
Q
4
J
4
0
8
3
6
7
J
K
3
9
3
9
Q
9
A
3
10
3
N/S +180
13

13 Comments
Getting Comments... loading...
.

Bottom Home Top