[benellis58]

Fortunately, all ended well, as we made 3D for a shared top of (a mere) 65.79 % on the board (yes, it was "shared" by MANY players)...but that was QUITE a 3D call...RED AGAINST WHITE (!!!)...by the GIBBO robot in the North with his flattish 4-3-4-2 (!) TWO(!)-count (!), with both his points in jacks...in a GIBBO system where his partner South could easily have had only a THREE-card diamond suit.

One of the COUNTLESS weaknesses of these GIBBO losers is that they never give any thought whatsoever to the vulnerability.

https://www.bridgeba...CHK%7Cmc%7C9%7C

[benellis58]

Why is West doubling 5D? Why is the GIB definition of West's double so typically useless? Why does East PULL the double to 5H?

The only one of those three questions that I can answer is the final one: East pulls the double because he knows that his "partner" West, being a GIBBO robot, is a raving lunatic. Note that East's PULL of the double does NOT correspond to the hand he SHOULD have according to the GIB definition of 5H.


https://www.bridgeba...S7%7Cpc%7CCJ%7C

[benellis58]

West leads a heart, won by dummy's ace, as declarer South pitches a club.

At trick two, declarer calls for dummy's club 6. "Defender" East, with J8 doubleton, plays the jack. WHY? This second hand HIGH stupidity was a hallmark of the GIB robots, who - as hard as this may be to believe - were even WORSE than the wretched GIBBO robots, thanks to some small improvements made by Lorserker a short while ago.

"Defender" West wins his club ace and of COURSE immediately plays another CLUB. WHY? Well, this question I can answer: He plays another CLUB because...these truly WITLESS and totally incompetent GIBBO fleabrains LOVE to return the suit DECLARER just played...undoubtedly because they ARE fleabrains. BTW, I sincerely apologize to any and all FLEAS that I might have insulted by that comparison!

https://www.bridgeba...DA%7Cmc%7C11%7C

[benellis58]

Here's a simple, straightforward equation:

GIBBO robots = garbage.

[benellis58]

50 % 0n this board. An example of one of the many bad things about the GIBBO system.

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

[benellis58]

It worked out fairly well, but I'm surprised that North passed in passout seat with his 5-5 in the majors.

https://www.bridgeba...CS5%7Cmc%7C6%7C

[benellis58]

East foolishly decides to pitch diamonds.

https://www.bridgeba...C8%7Cpc%7CS8%7C

[benellis58]

THREE hearts by North? Doesn't the WORLD open FOUR with that? Meanwhile, let's be very polite to EW and simply and quietly observe that they will probably not win awards for their "defence" on the hand. The GIB definitions will similarly FAIL to win praise.

https://www.bridgeba...SJ%7Cpc%7CC8%7C

[benellis58]

A...HEART (!) lead on this auction?!

A... complete (!) DUCK (!) of the heart lead at trick one?!

https://www.bridgeba...SJ%7Cpc%7CS8%7C

[benellis58]

I have written many very insulting things about the GIB definitions, the GIB/GIBBO system, and the GIB/GIBBO robots.

I must apologize.

Why? Because despite all my efforts, I have probably failed to convey how utterly pathetic and nauseating they are. I'm afraid my vocabulary is not extensive enough to adequately describe the full, sickening wretchedness of the pathetic definitions, the unworkable and antiquated joke of a system, and the world-class incompetence of the robots.

Worst of the worst? Certainly. Lowest of the low? Most definitely. Garbage that should long ago have been incinerated? Indubitably.

But those words don't even come close to adequately describing how truly contemptible and loathsome the GIBBO robots are, so, again I apologize.

[benellis58]

At trick three, the GIBBO loser in the West wins his heart ace. At trick four, he has an obvious club shift, but being a GIBBO robot, and therefore being less intelligent than a doorknob, he follows his lifelong sick, twisted, illogical, loser's philosophy of immediately returning the suit DECLARER just played. Thus, the fleabrain returns a heart. And of COURSE he ridiculously returns the heart jack.

Now, even if he had correctly returned a club, I still would have taken 11 tricks, but that doesn't excuse the jerk's typically lazy and stupid play.

It was gratifying to see that the two GIBBO numbskulls sitting East-West added yet another complete zero to their massive collection of failures. The only surprising thing is that these repulsive imbeciles don't get a zero on every board they play.

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/2rsk7jhe

[benellis58]

53.6 % on this board for "only" going one down in 4H.

Another fine example of why the GIBBO bidding system stinks like salami that's been sitting in Florida sunlight for seven months and fourteen days:

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/482a39kc

[benellis58]

East opens one CLUB, so of course West leads a...DIAMOND. He scores 7.1 & on the board. His opponents score 92.9 %.

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/yckk2smy

[benellis58]

South opens one HEART and later jumps to 2NT over North's 1S response. North raises to 3NT and all pass.

Thus, West is on lead against 3NT with 97652, 7, 752, K1095.

He thinks it's a positively BRILLIANT idea to lead his STIFF (!) 7...of HEARTS...INTO the declarer who OPENED one heart.

Spoiler alert: It was not brilliant. It was also not SANE! Declarer romped home with TWELVE tricks. North-South scored 92.9 % on the board. East- West scored a miserable but TOTALLY well-deserved 7.1 %.

I will begin my next sentence by quoting the late great Janes Brown in the first three underlined words, and then ad-libbing the remainder of the sentence with my own.

"Please, please, please"...INCINERATE these useless, repugnant GIBBO robots and replace them with DECENT ones!

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/443mryfy

[benellis58]

To any bridge player, the diamond situation is obvious at trick one. The "defender" sitting East, however, is not a bridge player (without quotation marks), he is a "bridge player" WITH "quotation marks - meaning in name ONLY, because like ALL GIBBO robots, he hasn't got a CLUE about how to play bridge.

He wins his diamond ace at trick one and switches to his spade queen. ASTONISHINGLY, two entire tricks have been played and he STILL hasn't shown the world how totally incompetent he is!

But such a MIRACLE can't go on forever, so at trick three the jackass confirms his status as one of the all-time worst "bridge players" in history when, braindead dweeb that he is, he goes back to diamonds. Why doesn't this incompetent loser take a job in a circus - where CLOWNS are appreciated?

https://www.bridgeba...CD8%7Cmc%7C9%7C

[benellis58]

Another hand from OMARHEUM, who wrote "Only 41%, though I thought I had done ok making 4S. 3NT did better at most tables."

First I'll comment on the bidding. Looking only at South's hand, the two likely calls over pard's 3C are 3S and 3NT. I don't think I would criticize either, and whichever works out better on this or any other random hand will depend to a large extent on the complete layout of said hand, because while bridge is definitely a game of skill, it is at the same time a game VERY much affected by the random LUCK of whatever a random layout turns out to be.

I think OMAR's 3S call was fine, and I suspect that it was probably a "better" choice than 3NT in general. 3S is more flexible, theoretically safer, and CAN involve partner North, who might even (albeit rarely) bid 3NT himself over 3S. OR he might pass, OR - as he did here - raise to 4S.

Unfortunately for OMAR, on THIS hand with THIS random layout, you would rather be in 3NT. 4S has no legitimate play, but thanks to the 4-4 diamond split, 3NT is cold. Furthermore, without a diamond lead, NS have 10 top tricks in no trump...and West probably won't lead a diamond. He will presumably make the normal heart lead, and South will trot home with an overtrick in 3NT.

So, I think OMAR was unlucky to have this particular layout on this random hand.

Now, let's get to the MISSION STATEMENT of this thread that Diana so wisely created and named, and let's do some GIBBO robot bashing.

West produced a sadly typical GIBBO "defence" - in other words, a truly abysmal one. After winning the THIRD defensive trick with his spade (trump) queen, it was 100 % obvious to play a DIAMOND. The South declarer had obviously been playing diamonds in the hope of setting up a third-round ruff in dummy, and East (to his credit AND to my amazement, considering that he too is a contemptible GIBBO robot) had obviously played spades (trump) in the hope of preventing that hoped-for third-round diamond ruff.

Furthermore, East was MARKED for the diamond ace, because if South had had it, he would have CASHED it on the second round of diamonds and then RUFFED his third (losing) diamond with dummy's lone remaining trump - as that had been his objective right from the start.

Moreover, South was MARKED with the high king of hearts, because if EAST had held it, surely he would have CASHED it before playing the second round of spades.

So, as usual, the GIBBO robot sitting West confirmed (for what - the 10 trillionth time, perhaps?) that he is one of the worst "defenders" the world of bridge has ever been TAINTED by! Note that if he wasn't such a complete M.O.R.O.N., he would have not just defeated 4S, but he would have defeated it TWO tricks: East- West already have three. An OBVIOUS diamond to East's OBVIOUS ace makes it four, and now East plays a CLUB, which West RUFFS with his last trump, to make it FIVE.

But because West is the bridge community's lowest form of slime, a repulsive and ignorant GIBBO robot, instead of beating 4S two tricks, he allowed it to make. GIBBO robots: the lowest of the low, the worst of the worst - always, ever, forever.

https://www.bridgeba...C3%7Cmc%7C10%7C

[benellis58]

This board shows how astoundingly incompetent the hopeless GIBBO robots are. Yes, I realize that this does not make this board special, as just about EVERY board shows what useless, pathetic garbage the GIBBO robots are.

But this board is worth reporting - in fact, SO worth reporting that I will discuss it in THREE consecutive posts! This post (1657) will document what happened at my table, and the following two posts (1658 and 1659) will show what happened with the same board but different results at two other tables.

So, to begin with, the story from my table:

Despite my 15 HCP, I passed pard's invitational 3C, because I suspected (correctly, as it turned out) that we had no game. First, pard (being a GIBBO robot!) often delivers less than what he should have (although in fairness, his 3C call here was reasonable). Second, my 15 HCP didn't look like they would really be worth 15, since the short jacks in both majors were probably valueless. Third, it was matchpoints, not IMPs. Fourth, pard's initial one SPADE response (opposite my stiff jack) was a cautionary signal, since any values he had there (apart from a potential ace) might prove to be useless. Finally, I bid much more conservatively on BBO than in "real" F2F bridge because (rightly or wrongly) my impression is that layouts tend to be more unfavourable on BBO than in "real" F2F hands.

The GIBBO robot in the West made one of his favourite (and usually ineffective) leads: top of a doubleton, in this case the 10 of diamonds from 102. This turned out to be as ineffective as usual. ALL my diamonds were IMMEDIATELY winners. They would have been such even without the lead, thanks to the very favourable layout with the suit 2-2 and the queen onside, but I wouldn't have KNOWN that IMMEDIATELY without the lead.

More importantly, though, I was on lead at trick two, so - having ESCAPED a heart lead, I was able to quickly pitch one of my two TOP heart losers on pard's second high spade, and then knock out the trump (club) ace.

A DECENT West, upon winning his trump ace at trick four, would find the now OBVIOUS play of a heart, holding me to "only" 11 tricks, as I would lose the trump ace (which he had just scored) and the OBVIOUS heart ace. I had been BORN with three TOP losers (two hearts and a club), so making eleven tricks should be good. But...I made an "impossible" TWELVE (!) tricks, because THIS West was NOT "a DECENT West" - he was a typically braindead GIBBO robot, which he proved...beyond even a SHADOW of a doubt...by STUPIDLY playing a second diamond! There's "stupid", and then there's "STUPID", and trust me: GIBBO robots (the pond scum of the bridge world) are always "STUPID". I won his foolish diamond play, and claimed, pulling the remaining enemy trumps and pitching my SECOND (TOP!) heart loser on dummy's fifth diamond.

I expected not a top, but a GOOD score. We can't make 5C, as the opponents have three TOP tricks (two hearts and a club) and we can't make 3NT, as they have SIX...TOP winners (five hearts and a club) and they BOTH have a natural heart lead against 3NT (all the more so in view of North's 1S bid).

Not only did we avoid the "impossible" games, but with plus 170 for 3C with THREE (!) overtricks, we rated to outscore (or at least tie) any others who stopped in a club partial...and also any who stopped in a NT partial, since there was NO way they would take TEN tricks in a NT partial and score plus 180.

When I saw the actual score on the board, I was, shall we say, a tad disappointed. We obtained a mere 57.69 %. This is why:

We beat five pairs:

A: One played in a bizarre 5 hearts (!), not surprisingly going down SIX (!) in their 2-2 (!) "fit". Perhaps a misclick by the human?
B: One played in three diamonds, making ten tricks. A heart was led (probably because West was steered off his beloved doubleton lead because his doubleton here was now TRUMP), so EW took two top hearts plus the club ace.
C: One played, as we did, in 3C, but made "only" the NORMAL ten tricks that SHOULD have been a par result. EW defended differently, but not any better, so the human declarer SHOULD have taken 12 tricks but he badly misplayed the hand. (Sorry, anonymous human. I didn't say it to bash you, but just to give an accurate account of what happened.)
D: Two others also played in 3C, making ELEVEN tricks, one MORE than par (the NORMAL ten) but one less than our TWELVE. These two declarers received the same joke of a "defence" that we did, but (like the human above who took TEN tricks in 3C) also badly misplayed the hand. (Sorry to you two anonymous human declarers also, but it's that "accuracy" thing again.)

We tied five pairs. Four of them declared 3C, as we did, and made the "impossible" 12 tricks, as we did. The fifth pair declared FOUR clubs, and also made the "impossible" 12 tricks.

Okay, all fairly understandable so far. BUT... we actually LOST (!) to three NS pairs:

A: One of them bid the "unmakeable" 3NT and...MADE (!)...wait for it...TWELVE (!!!!!) tricks to score an OBVIOUS 100 % on the board.
B: Two of them bid the "unmakeable" 5C and MADE it with an OVERTRICK, taking an "impossible" TWELVE tricks.

In the next post (1658) I will present what happened when 5C was bid, and in the one after that (1659) I will present what happened when 3NT was bid. Meanwhile, here's the link to the board at my table:

https://www.bridgeba...C8%7Cmc%7C12%7C