Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ping Hu
1 2 3 4 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 23 24 25 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't know if they regular post score on early round. So far the winners (Qualified for tomorrow) are
Nickell,
Mikyska,
Brenner,
McCallum,
Collins,
Robbins,
Kaminski

In head to head matches Bruno and Bender are leading their higher seeded opponents. All other higher seeded teams had upper hands.
Nov. 24, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have a screenshot but don’t know how to upload it here. I’ll try to type them here.

Head to head:
Nickel vs Hubbert
Levine vs Morris
O’Rourke vs Glickman
Onstott vs Reynolds
Lewis vs VanCleeff
Silverman vs Bruno
Kasle vs Bender

4 way in group of two:
Mikyska vs Vinciguerra
King vs Brenner
McCallum vs Doner
Markowitz vs Collins
Robbins vs McDaniel
Bell vs Kaminski
Nov. 24, 2017
Ping Hu edited this comment Nov. 24, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
ACBL will use Bridgemate to do player entries for Monday 1pm bracket KO. If you are going to enter this event, it is best to arrive early and have all player's number available when you buy the entry. You will be directed to use Bridgemate to enter all player numbers after paying entry fee. The information will be used to create bracket.

In addition, Sunday afternoon Swiss team will also use Bridgemate to enter player numbers and scores.
Nov. 24, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Deleted
Nov. 20, 2017
Ping Hu edited this comment Nov. 20, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It looks like some links are broken (out of date) now. Try the following one.
http://bridgewebs.com/cgi-bin/bwoj/bw.cgi?club=westwood&pid=display_page5
This has most complete information. It even has movement file if you want to use it with ACBLscore.
Nov. 17, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There was a prior discussion.
http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/web-movements-help/

You could also find the general description from wiki.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duplicate_bridge_movements#Web_movements
Nov. 16, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You could achieve both goals (maximize pairs playing same boards and simple movement) by using web movement.
Nov. 16, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No. Nothing was alerted. Another piece of information is this was the least board in Swiss team qualifying round (2nd to last round). Based on the results from previous boards you feel your team falls behind in this round.
Oct. 22, 2017
Ping Hu edited this comment Oct. 22, 2017
Go
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This(play and defense) is where I think DeepMind's new AI learning ability could help that current Bridge Robot fails. My understanding is it has a policy network and a valuation network. The policy network generate a list of “moves” (in bridge it would be a list of possible cards to play), valuation network will calculate and assign a score for each move the likelihood to win. Comparing with GO, bridge has much less “move” to choose from and much less variation of compute (we only have 52 cards to start with and you could see at least half of them after opening lead).

The current Bridge robot must not have good valuation model. A lot of factors must go into it - what cards have been played, what happened in the bidding etc. I don't believe current program has considered all these factors.

What deep learning could do is it could generate millions a similar hands in training, let's say opponent lead 7 with this pattern (suppose opponents was quiet in bidding) it could use its learning to determine what the best card to play.
Oct. 21, 2017
Go
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think it is just a matter of time computer is going to beat human in bridge. Three years ago nobody expected computer could beat human players. The most optimistic expectation was it needs at least a decade. Now even world champion could not compete with AlphaGo.

The argument that Bridge needs experience and intuition is same as Go players described their game before AlphaGo. It is clear current computer Bridge programs are not up to the tasks. It doesn't mean something revolutionary like AlphaGo could not.

One big problem is Bridge is bidding. In order for computer to achieve its potential, we could not limit it to use bidding system just to human one. Computer should be able to invent its own bidding system. This could be helpful to human players as well. It is my firm belief that instead of defining what bids are legal and illegal, we should aim at improving game including bidding but not limit the potentials.
Oct. 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ian,

I would like to add miniBridge could also help players to learn declarer play and defense. Since you know how many HCP each player has, both declarer and defender could use that information during playing.

I used miniBridge mainly as a tool to introduce bridge to new players (most of my students are upper elementary to junior high). This year I decided to stay on miniBridge a little longer. I also had my students who had learnt a couple years to go back to miniBridge and practice declarer play.
Oct. 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you want to get people to play bridge in 15 minutes, try mini-bridge. It skips the whole bidding part that is most difficult to new players.
http://web2.acbl.org/documentLibrary/teachers/Minibridge.pdf
Oct. 20, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I filled one during a NABC two years ago and never heard anything from it.
Oct. 9, 2017
Ping Hu edited this comment Oct. 9, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How do we find out what happened after filling out a form?
Oct. 9, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have a solution for this. See my comments early for this thread with link to
http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/an-elo-rating-system-for-bridge/
Oct. 4, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Steven, you just pointed out the solution: rating should be on partnership.
Oct. 4, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You should look at how chess tournament is run.
Oct. 4, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, I have him in mind as well.
Oct. 2, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, I recognize the current rule for Bridge tournament is too complicated. For a bridge show we just need basic rules about bidding and play, without any restrictions about what could bid and what could not. It could even start with rubber bridge. To make a good show, you want to see some wild bids. If everyone bids same, it would be dull.

I recall I read Wilt Chamberlain liked to play bridge after his retirement from basketball. We currently have Bill Gates and Warren Buffet as active players. I suppose bridge as a competitive game has some attractions for certainly people competitiveness is in their blood. It is a matter how to introduce our game to them.
Oct. 2, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That is the issue for commentators to make it fun to watch. The idea is not to make it a top level professional Bridge, but make it fun to watch!
Oct. 2, 2017
1 2 3 4 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 23 24 25 26
.

Bottom Home Top