Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Paul Weinstock
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 70 71 72 73
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Christopher says:

“I sometimes suspect the bots have been programmed to pause”.

The bots are also doing something much more sadistic. They play instantly at first two tricks of a suit, and “think” with a small third card at the third trick. This can be a software induced plot who tries to destabilize declarer's thinking. Or perhaps I think that the advanced bots are too advanced…
11 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Stephen says, and Christopher agrees:

“It would be extremely odd if there wasn't a pause after the lead”.

Disagree fully. Give me please ONE logical reason that would delay putting down the dummy in a fraction of a second after the lead. If you think of the acceptable thinking of the line of play, that should be done after seeing the dummy, not before. So ?!
11 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Seems to me that East has a 5C mandatory bid here. That would be my choice for a single worse bid.

I also don't see any tricks to spare, because almost everyone's opening lead should be a spade.
June 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That will work the same way for/against everybody, so this can't be a full answer.

To make it full answer to the question, BBO should build a profile of a particular player and “work” against his way of playing robot bridge in order to temperate a rapid accumulation of BBO/ACBL points. A very long shot.

On the other hand, like oil floating on top of the water, the good players will eventually overcome adversity and rise anyway. The field will be compacted towards the middle a little more.

I still can't see a valid and understandable purpose for the robot “working” actively against the player.
June 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Stephen says:

“I don't particularly see why ‘pauses’ at certain times would be odd.”

Including long pause when putting down the dummy after opp lead ?! Come on, start seeing…
June 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“BBO has yet to explain why, when one has a two way finesse for a Q or a restricted choice position surfaces, that there is a pause before a bot plays of noticeable duration that does not exist any other time”.

Agree fully. A pause almost as long as the pause before tabling the dummy, after the first lead.

The main question remains, why ? I can't find any logical explanation why the software should try to work “against” the human.
May 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm telling you, Rich, that in 3 different instances, with advanced bots, same bidding, same play (to the spots) for 4 tricks, and at trick 5 play diverged. After the play I told pd that he payed the bots to beat me… :).
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“The Internet is full of herds of braying idiots”. Agree fully.
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, Rich, when playing challenge I play with advanced bots all the time. So ?
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Rich, paranoid or not, but you see that several folks think alike. When a few tell you to go to sleep, perhaps time has come to comply :)… or not.

Why are those things happening… that I really dont know. Another funny example: I play a lot of challenges against my usual pd, and I saw several times identical bidding and identical carding until trick 4, and suddenly at trick 5 my robot gets crazy and his robot continues the previous line of play (or the other way around). Paranoid ot not, these are the facts. Interesting, no ?
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Speaking about “pregnant” pauses, the one which infuriates me the most is after my lead, before tabling the dummy. It takes clearly much more than it should be, and gives me the impression that the robots are arranging things according to the lead. Comparing to that, LHO “thinking” with a small doubleton when Qx is offside becames kids game.

Why ? To what purpose ? I'm clueless…
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Last hand, 20 up… Knowing the opps could be a factor. The importance of a big win can be another factor. Approaching lunch time could influence my decision. And so on…

I think I'll try 4s not vulnerable, or a civilized 1s vulnerable.
May 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I, personally, would be very happy if BBO implements in the forseeable future 10% of Matt's and others' suggestions. But I feel that it will take a very long time to see it happen.

Good work, Matt. Thumbs up !
April 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Steve writes:

“I surmise from Matt Kidds post elsesite that scaling up robots is easy”.

We wish… If it was so easy, it would have been done long time ago.

The robots behave like the Russian who was taken back in the day to KGB, get beaten for three days and then asked: “Do you have any political opinions” ? The man said: “Yes, I do, but I don't agree with them”.

In other words, too many times the explanation for the bid doesn't match even a little bit the hand the robot has. That is a serious flaw. And many other comparable things.

So, scaling up the robots has a long way to go.
April 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“virtually all my playing time coming in the last 2.5 weeks”

So you have no idea how it should be working, but you beat the drums anyway.

“you may feel less stressed if you consider that you are getting what you are paying for”.

May this be the biggest stress in my life… and I dont get what I pay for. Simple as that.
April 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I appreciate very much, Ray, that your time is worth the work of counting my daily expenses in BBO. I never did that. I hope you do this for my sake, to be sure I'll have enough left for my daily piece of bread.

I didn't said anywhere that I want a partial refund. I would like to see something alike, as a gesture of good faith, but I would feel great if BBO comes forward and give, say, one additional free game to people playing in these times at 3 daylongs.

What you say, Ray, if you were BBO would you do that ?

On the other hand, one can look at this matter as “nickels” and rightly so. I can understand that.
April 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Good question. I play all the daylong robot tournaments, for a sum of X. Based on repetitive breaks, time waste and general bad feeling, half of X would be just enough.

A nice gesture of wise management from BBO would be to give something back, even if symbolic. It would look great.
April 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This comment has been marked as inappropriate by the moderator(s).
April 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Norman writes : “Oh, so feisty, and so stupid!”

I understand that you write this looking at yourself in the mirror. Besides that, the ensuing rant is completely not understandable for me. I conclude that you are unable to simply say “sorry, I misunderstand the issue” and prefer to troll anyway.

Here, I'll help you. Concentrate. When you pay for something, you expect something in return. I state that the product is partially faulty (robots game) and we don't receive what we pay for. What do you say about this ?
April 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm sure that you're going to agree with me here, Frances, that the line which you took out of the post implies at most that I know the problem. From here to extrapolating that I know to solve it, it's a long shot.

…And Richard Willey corrected me immediately that we're talking about servers. That's the difference between someone directing the shots (me) and someone pinpointing the shots (Rich).
April 7
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 70 71 72 73
.

Bottom Home Top