[benellis58]

Ya know, somehow I think the GIBBO robot sitting West had a better lead:

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/ebuxsa4n

[benellis58]

This obviously worked out well, but that was QUITE a 4S bid...red against white (!)...by the GIBBO robot in the North. If a HUMAN made such a bid, I think suspicions would be aroused!

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/yc36cufs

[pescetom]

benellis58, on 2026-April-01, 03:00, said:

Nice diamond stopper for your 1NT bid, Mr. East, in the suit in which your LHO OVERCALLED.

Or, uhh...maybe NOT. (And yes, I'm aware that in the modern world many experts do recommend a 1NT bid in this type of situation...but it did not work out well here for the GIBBO robot.)

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/2p9yd8zh

My apologies if I nitpick almost at random in your admirable chronicle of GIB foibles...
but the explanation (albeit reticent) does not promise a stopper and it *did* work out well here, or at least it should have done in a better field...
unless I miss something you have 4♥ making vulnerable (lose two spades and a club, if diamonds behave).

[pescetom]

benellis58, on 2026-April-10, 08:15, said:

This obviously worked out well, but that was QUITE a 4S bid...red against white (!)...by the GIBBO robot in the North. If a HUMAN made such a bid, I think suspicions would be aroused!

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/yc36cufs

I think all three robots bid well up to and including 4S... the perverse X by West ruins things, as often.

[benellis58]

Hi, Pescetom. Thanks for your two posts immediately above. It's always a pleasure to read what you have to say, whether here or elsewhere.

Regarding the first hand you commented on: You are quite correct that that the GIB definition did not promise a diamond stopper, although I think that is just one more example of how inferior the GIB definitions usually are. A good definition would say one of the following three things, depending on what the system recommends: Either: "Shows a diamond stopper"...or "Denies a diamond stopper"...or "May or may not have a diamond stopper". Instead, the GIB definition negligently gives NO explanation of this key issue.

You are also quite correct that NS can make 4H. In fact, they would take exactly the same 10 tricks that they they took against East's 1NT. Where you are not correct, however, is where you say "it 'did' work out well here", because it most definitely did not, as NS obtained a fine score and EW a dismal one. Yes, "in a better field", perhaps EW would have fared better (or perhaps not), because EVEN in a "better" field, four hearts is not a contract that is easy to find when North and South are each looking only at their OWN hands. Note that for NS to do better than the plus 200 they achieved by beating East's 1NT four tricks, they would have to not only find the 4-4 heart fit, but also bid all the way up to the GAME. If they stopped in a heart partial, they would score only plus 170 and do worse than the plus 200 they actually achieved.

As for the second hand you referenced, the robotic bidding was not as horrendous as it often is, but I think it's an overstatement to say that "all three robots bid well...". I'm not convinced that West's 3D call was his best choice, and as you indicated, "the perverse X by West ruins things, as often". Beyond that, East's final pass was not a success, considering that 10 NS tricks were ice cold in spades and I actually could have made 11. I didn't, because being in a doubled game, I opted to play as safely as possible to ensure making the contract. But you will note that EW had an excellent save in 5D, which would go down ONLY one trick! In fact, looking only at the EW hands, it would actually MAKE if a hook worked, although admittedly the hook rated to lose (and in fact WOULD lose on the actual layout), given my 1NT opening.

My post of the second hand was not about the overall robotic bidding on that hand anyway, though - it was merely to highlight North's 4S call, which would either end up being "brave" and "creative" if it turned out well (as it did) OR "wild" and "foolhardy" if it DIDN'T turn out well. The KEY point of my post was "If a HUMAN made such a bid, I think suspicions would be aroused!"...because, successful or not, the bid was indeed "stepping out"...and in the modern bridge world, when HUMANS choose such actions and they turn out to be successful, many observers suspect that cheating might be involved. The ACBL's EDGAR initiative, for example, might (?) flag a player who frequently "stepped out" in this fashion and hit the jackpot = as North did here when he caught me, his partner, with a fine hand including FIVE GOOD SPADES.

Thanks again for your valued input, Pescetom, and best wishes. I look forward, as always, to reading your future comments, whether in this thread or elsewhere.

[benellis58]

The GIBBO robots continue to be the absolutely worst "bridge players" that I have ever encountered. Not a single human player that I have ever met has come even close to being as staggeringly hopeless as the garbage known as GIBBO robots. Check out the beauty linked below.

I chose to bid 2C over North's 1NT because I have seen many times how these clueless jerks stupidly bid 1NT when wide open in one or both majors EVEN when they have a fit for pard's minor. I also KNEW that we had at least one minor suit fit of at least eight cards, since North was known from his 1NT call to have at most 6 cards in the majors. Playing with a HUMAN partner, I would have passed 1NT, because I have respect for human partners. For GIBBO robots, on the other hand, I have only the deepest, everlasting contempt.

When I bid 2C I was aware that it might not turn out best, but as always I was quite willing to back my judgment, and if my judgment turned out to be "wrong" on this (or any other) random hand, I would be quite willing to accept the result. Que sera sera.

As it turns out, on the actual layout North would likely have taken 8 tricks in 1NT (losing four hearts and one club after the normal and obvious heart lead) for plus 120...whereas 2C (or even 3C if North raised) would have probably taken "only" 9 tricks for "only" plus 110, so on THIS random hand my decision to bid 2C turned out to be "wrong". Okay, c'est la vie and que sera sera. That's life. Mea culpa. But this thread isn't about bashing ME (although I just did exactly that!) - it's about bashing the HOPELESS robots, and THAT is why I'm posting this hand. It's because...

North had J105, K4, K92, J9765. So, did he PASS 2C...or did he raise to 3C? Those seem to be his only two options.

Answer: The ignorant, illogical M.O.R.O.N. bid...two DIAMONDS. That's right, folks, with FIVE (!) clubs and THREE (!) diamonds, this phenomenally stupid TROUT took a "preference" to diamonds! These ignorant pierces of trash have NO idea of how to play bridge. They are also hampered by a joke of a system and by a set of GIB definitions that are utter nonsense.

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/2p83u6rc

[benellis58]

We got a good score on this board (92.9 %) but that does NOT excuse North's wild, undisciplined, unilateral, wasteful, unscientific, and downright STUPID...LEAP to SEVEN hearts over my THREE spade preference. At the time he made this ignorant bid, we were in an UNINTERRUPTED auction against SILENT opponents, and we had FOUR levels of bidding space available to intelligently, accurately, and scientifically reach the grand.

It HAPPENED to be cold...but on another layout it might have had no play. For starters, we were missing enough points that we could conceivably have been off an ace. Since Bozo the Clown in the North was my "partner" I'm happy that he lucked out with his stupid jump, but "luck out" he did...and on another layout he could just as easily have BOMBED out. What was the imbecile's rush? The GIBBO robots rot.

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/296pv9ct

[benellis58]

98.89 % on this board for making an overtrick in 3H...largely thanks to a typically stupid lead from the GIBBO robot in the East. For some perverse reason, these fools love leading doubletons, including DANGEROUS doubleton leads such as QX or JX.

On this hand, the TROUT led his club queen from Q9 doubleton. He was LUCKY that it didn't cost him a CLUB trick (due to the club layout around the table, I could always score four club winners and no club losers anyway), but it DID cost him a tempo. Then his stupidity became even MORE apparent: He won a heart (trump) at trick two and then - to show the WORLD what a dumbo he is, he actually played his remaining club. Twit! I could now establish a spade trick to pitch my (dummy's) diamond loser because Mr. M.O.R.O.N. in the East had FAILED to EVER knock out our diamond ace. And why was the ignorant clown leading the second club anyway? Was the lamebrain looking for a ruff with his...NATURAL TRUMP TRICK?

https://www.bridgeba...DK%7Cmc%7C10%7C

[benellis58]

North stupidly passes South's 1D opening bid instead of bidding 1H. This is LOSING bridge...which is what GIBBO robots EXCEL at!

But all is well for NS, because passed-hand East, in passout seat, balances with a perfectly fine and normal double. (It's not often that I get to say that an action by one of the repulsive GIBBO robots is "perfectly fine and normal", but to East's credit, his double WAS flawless).

West, on the other hand, was definitely NOT flawless. HE bid like a typical GIBBO robot - in other words, stupidly! The clueless dolt JUMPED to 2NT, pitifully defined (as usual) by GIB as "Two NT to double...". Yeah, thanks SO MUCH, Mr. GIB for that CRUCIAL piece of information. But let me make sure that I have understood it correctly: Do you mean that his 2NT bid...which he JUST bid in response to his partner's double was...and let me make sure that I have this right..."Two NT to double"? Oh, wow - SO useful...NOT!

But the real issue is why on EARTH...with a TWELVE-count...would West be jumping in NT, inviting a game...opposite a partner who had PASSED as dealer, who was therefore KNOWN to have at MOST 11 HCP, and whose double was actually defined by GIB as showing "NINE (!) to eleven HCP"?

The *****ous simpleton in the West got what he deserved when his 2NT contract went down one and he "earned" himself a result of minus 100 for a miserable score of 5.65 % on the board for EW. As they so often do, these simps had turned a plus score into a minus for absolutely NO reason other than their massive, unending ignorance about the game of bridge. Why don't these pinheads take up some other hobby, ANY other hobby, and stop TARNISHING the bridge world with their revolting presence?

https://www.bridgeba...CQ%7Cpc%7CSJ%7C

[benellis58]

Stupid opening lead by North. (No surprise at all, given that he's a GIBBO robot.) A spade of all things - declarer's KNOWN second suit - INTO declarer.

Then after winning trick three, North decides to shift to a diamond. Okay, fair enough, but ignoramus that he is, he shifts to the NINE of diamonds from 10973. Why the HELL would he do that apart from sheer, unadulterated, UNENDING stupidity?

Despite North's BEST efforts to blow the defence, we still beat the contract two tricks for a decent score, but you know what? THIS is "what" : The GIBBO robots - ALL GIBBO robots, whether North, West, or East, STINK as "bridge players".

https://www.bridgeba...CQ%7Cpc%7CCT%7C

[benellis58]

Another stupid lead of a doubleton. Why do these rejects LOVE leading doubletons and HATE leading their partnership suits?

https://www.bridgeba...C9%7Cpc%7CSQ%7C

[benellis58]

Typically pathetic GIB definition of South's 2NT. It begins (sigh!) with the totally unnecessary and INSULTING words "Invitational to 3NT game". Yeah, thanks, Mr. GIB, but I think EVERYONE already KNOWS that 3NT is "game" and does NOT need to be constantly and very annoyingly reminded of it in your poorly-written GIB definitions.

More importantly, though, the definition claims that South's bid shows "16-17 HCP". WHY, pray tell? Why can't South have EIGHTEEN...as, in fact, he DID on this hand?

What's that, Mr. GIB? You jave no answer? Yeah, that's what I thought! You know, maybe it's time to...fix all your truly rotten GIB definitions!

https://www.bridgeba...CDT%7Cmc%7C8%7C

[benellis58]

I actually wanted to make a PENALTY double of 3C. I saw that the hopeless GIB definition said that it was takeout, but I did it anyway, figuring maybe I'd luck out and pard would pass, but even if he took it out we'd be fine because I had a moose.

The enemy then stumbled into FOUR clubs, which I DESPERATELY wanted to double for penalty, but I saw that that double too would STUPIDLY be for takeout, so I passed, figuring that I'd still collect a number (albeit a SMALLER number than I would collect playing a DECENT system instead of the garbage that GIBBO foists on us), and if I doubled the ox across from me would probably find a way to bury us. We beat 4C by three tricks (sadly not doubled, thanks to being handcuffed by the antiquated, useless GIBBO system) and collected 300 (rather than the 800 that any DECENT system would have produced). Oh well, at least we scored 77.8 % on the board, which was was not too bad.

https://www.bridgeba...SK%7Cpc%7CDT%7C

[benellis58]

West leads a spade against South's 3NT, which I think is fine. I would also lead a spade, but I would not waste the 10 like West did - I would lead the deuce. Meanwhile, East did well to correctly withhold his king, so these two GIBBO robots have greatly surprised me by not blowing anything at trick one. For them, that is a major accomplishment. But - as the world would expect - they soon fall from grace and demonstrate, as usual, their total incompetence.

West wins his diamond queen at trick two, and - here we go (!) - as expected - the stunningly stupid clown plays his diamond king (!!!) at trick three. What a fool. What a perennial loser. What a total failure at bridge. These GIBBO robots (and their GIB predecessors) are - bar none - the absolutely worst "bridge players" that I have EVER seen.

https://www.bridgeba...H9%7Cpc%7CHQ%7C

[benellis58]

The jerk in the North - oops, sorry, I'll try to be more polite. I'll use a more pleasant term than "jerk". Just a minute while I think of a synonym for "jerk" that sounds nicer. Okay, I've thought of one, so now I'll begin again:

The GIBBO robot in the North...makes a stupid overbid of 2NT on his mere...NINE (!) HCP. Even his own GIB definition says that it shows a "Balanced invite - 4-5 spades; 10-12 HCP". These pieces of unmitigated trash can't even adhere to their own GIB definitions.

https://www.bridgeba...SA%7Cpc%7CHT%7C

[benellis58]

Bidding 4H and making an overtrick here was worth a shared top, so the result was fine, but (sigh) North's bidding was NOT fine - it was as ridiculous as GIBBO bidding so OFTEN is. The GIBBO robots are pathetic.

Note that the M.O.R.O.N. bid 2H...AND 3H...AND 4H. He bid hearts THREE times...all by himself...opposite a partner who could have been void in the suit. He did this on a six-bagger, true, but a moth-eaten, empty six-bagger of A97542...AND he did this while NEVER supporting diamonds (the suit his partner OPENED!) despite holding KJ72. What a clueless twit! Had he bid intelligently, NS would STILL have reached the decent 4H contract, but they would have done it the right way...as a partnership...rather than by having the bozo in the North unilaterally romping into the game and being LUCKY enough to find South with a useful hand. It's long past the time to throw the GIBBO robots into the nearest garbage can and replace them with DECENT robots that have a CLUE about how to play bridge.

BTW, the GIB definition of North's 4H is "6+ hearts; 12+ HCP; 12- total points". His hand is 103, A97542, KJ72, 2. Do YOU see "12+ HCP"? No, neither do I. I see...a mere EIGHT (!!!) HCP. a full FOUR (!!!) fewer than his "promised" MINIMUM of 12!

And let's not forget to mention that the definition itself is typical GIB...GARBAGE...because (sigh, here we go again for the UMPTEENTH time) HCP can be less than or equal to "total" points, but they CANNOT be more, yet this hopelessly incorrect GIB nonsense, like so MANY useless and inaccurate GIB definitions, indicates the opposite, since it ridiculously states that the HCP are at LEAST 12 and possibly as many as 37 (since the lazy, sloppy "12+ HCP" with no upper ceiling literally means 12-37), while simultaneously stating that the "total" points are at MOST 12 and could be as low as ZERO (since the lazy, sloppy "12- total points" literally means 0-12). After the LONG time that these robots and definitions have been in existence, there is no excuse for this ongoing lack of quality.

https://www.bridgeba...D8%7Cmc%7C10%7C

[benellis58]

NS have 13 top tricks in NT, so East's play did not cost...but of course it was STILL blindingly stupid, as GIBBO plays SO often are.

West led the 4 of hearts against South's 6NT, dummy North tabled the 932 (with declarer South calling for the three), and East, with J87, instead of CORRECTLY playing the jack, stupidly fell back on that old GIB imbecilic habit of third hand LOW and inserted his 7. Once in a while third hand low is correct (as it was, for example, in post #1094) but it is USUALLY incorrect, as it was here (even though it was irrelevant in this case because of the top 13 NS tricks).

https://www.bridgeba...HT%7Cmc%7C13%7C

[benellis58]

NS scored 100 % on this board for bidding and making 7NT. Due to the club position, the hand would always make, as long as declarer read the situation correctly...but against the ultra- M.O.R.O.N.I.C. GIBBO robot in the West, declarer South never even had to read the situation, as he had an immediate 13 tricks and CLAIMED when he won his spade TEN (!) at trick one. How did that happen?

Well, it happened because - and I hope you're sitting down - the FABULOUSLY clueless GIBBO robot in the West chair led the EIGHT (!!!!!) of spades...from QJ8 tripleton (!!!!!) against 6NT!

These pieces of trash NEVER cease to amaze with their overwhelming stupidity.

https://www.bridgeba...S3%7Cmc%7C13%7C

[benellis58]

Have I ever mentioned that the GIB definitions are pathetic, the GIBBO system is antiquated, illogical, and basically useless, and that the disgusting GIBBO robots are undoubtedly and by far the absolutely worst "bridge players" that I have ever seen?

Oh, I have?

Thank Heaven! I would have felt very guilty if I had not stated those essential observations.

By the way, isn't it long past the time for the execrable GIBBO robots to be buried in a robot graveyard and replaced by DECENT robots who actually know how to play bridge?

[benellis58]

These GIBBO robots are world class I.D.I.O.T.S.

North and East pass. South opens 1H. West passes.

North bids 1NT. Since he is a passed hand, this is not forcing in the inferior joke that is the GIBBO system. Passed-hand East bids 2H, Michaels, showing at least 5-5 in spades and an unknown minor, although the typically useless GIB definition doesn't even make that clear, as it says NOTHING about the five card minor. Yes, it DOES say "Michaels" and yes, most players likely know what Michaels shows, but perhaps not ALL players do...which is EXACTLY why when a bid is defined or explained, it is SUPPOSED to actually be EXPLAINED (!) and not just lazily NAMED. This LOUSY GIB definition is not acceptable according to the proprieties...yet SO many OTHER worthless GIB definitions burden us with unnecessary and useless GARBAGE such as "minor suit opening", "one over one", "invitational to 3NT game", and other stupidities of the same ilk.

Hey, Mr. GIB, here's a constructive suggestion for your definitions: Explain what NEEDS to be explained, and don't waste everyone's time with unnecessary GARBAGE that doesn't need to be mentioned...instead of doing the REVERSE in both cases!

Anyway, South now passes, and West bids 2NT asking for East's minor. North passes, East bids 3D (his minor) and that becomes the final contract, as all pass. 3D goes down one, but that's not the story. The STORY is West's imbecilic 2NT bid. The loser had K8, AK1073, 108, 7532. Why didn't the braindead dipstick just pass 2S opposite his PASSED-HAND partner? By virtue of his ridiculous 2NT bid, he put his partnership a level HIGHER in a LOWER-scoring strain, STILL in a 5-2 fit. Do these GIBBO twits live entirely on a diet of stupidity pills?

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/49wzmtdr