Result -870 (after a spade lead). Couldn't Northbot have found a heart bid?
Page 1 of 1
takeout
#1
Posted 2018-April-13, 17:47
Result -870 (after a spade lead). Couldn't Northbot have found a heart bid?
#5
Posted 2018-April-14, 10:41
There is no rationale. This is what we in the software industry call a bug - behavior different from what the implementer intended.
#12
Posted 2018-April-15, 16:49
wank, on 2018-April-14, 13:58, said:
pass is pretty bad, but double is pretty bad too.
When you describe pass as "pretty bad" I'm reminded of a famous quote by the physicist Wolfgang Pauli who once said of a colleague's work, "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong."
Pass isn't pretty bad or even really bad. It's preposterous.
The worst you can say about the balancing double is that it's aggressive.
#13
Posted 2018-April-16, 07:00
wbartley, on 2018-April-15, 16:49, said:
When you describe pass as "pretty bad" I'm reminded of a famous quote by the physicist Wolfgang Pauli who once said of a colleague's work, "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong."
Pass isn't pretty bad or even really bad. It's preposterous.
The worst you can say about the balancing double is that it's aggressive.
Pass isn't pretty bad or even really bad. It's preposterous.
The worst you can say about the balancing double is that it's aggressive.
preposterous is right. possibly the millionth time GIBBO passes with such hands. seems to be a pretty easy bug-fix.
vrock
#14
Posted 2018-April-16, 12:34
virgosrock, on 2018-April-16, 07:00, said:
possibly the millionth time GIBBO passes with such hands. seems to be a pretty easy bug-fix.
If it was easy, this would have been fixed years ago. As a software developer, I think it should be easy for a better designed GIB to be fixed. But we are basically stuck with the GIB that was originally designed 25 years ago.
#15
Posted 2018-April-16, 12:53
johnu, on 2018-April-16, 12:34, said:
If it was easy, this would have been fixed years ago. As a software developer, I think it should be easy for a better designed GIB to be fixed. But we are basically stuck with the GIB that was originally designed 25 years ago.
and yet one of the stephens gets better results from old GIB on PC.
vrock
#16
Posted 2018-April-16, 17:27
virgosrock, on 2018-April-16, 12:53, said:
and yet one of the stephens gets better results from old GIB on PC.
4 things.
1. Basic bots (I assume that's what OP was using. OP can correct me if I'm wrong) make frequent embarrassingly bad mistakes and BBO basically disavows fixing most of them.
2. Fixing 1 thing breaks another thing, and fixing 1 auction doesn't fix a very similar auction. This seems to be a major problem with GIB programming.
3. The old standalone GIB has the full and unlimited resources of the computer it is run on. The BBO bots have limited time sharing of network resources.
4. I'm (just) guessing the BBO bots occasionally do better than the standalone GIBs.
#17
Posted 2018-April-17, 09:56
Yes doubles and passes of doubles are bad, but I think this is more related to the badness of balancing auctions than the badness of doubles. I still think at some point balancing auctions will be worked on all at once in a major overhaul.
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
Page 1 of 1