BBO Discussion Forums: Benellis58 GIB bashing on repeat - BBO Discussion Forums

This board was played 25 times. On 24 of those 25, it was played by South in 4H. South made 12 tricks 19 times and (only) 11 tricks the other 5 times.

The 25th result was NS playing in ONE NO TRUMP (!) and making 4 overtricks. The anonymous human South opened a normal 1S, but bizarrely passed (!) North's non-forcing (since North was a passed hand) 1NT.

This post, however, is not about humans. As always, it's about the foibles of GIB and GIBBO robots. On this hand, the auction at the 24 tables where South declared 4H was:

North: Pass. South: 1S. North: 1NT (not forcing). South: 2H. All normal so far...but then North...JUMPED to FOUR hearts with a hand where I really think he should have bid only three: 87, A1087, AJ1054, 65. On this hand, South obviously would have carried on to four anyway, but on many hands where South would PASS 3H, 4H would have little or no play, especially considering that South, who opened in THIRD seat, might have had a LIGHT opener. Furthermore, this was a matchpoint game, not an IMP game.

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

It looked to me that my best shot at a lot of club tricks was to slide the 9, hoping for the jack onside. Unfortunately, on the random layout of this random hand, West had J6 and East had A732, so the winning line would have been a club to the king or queen (winning) followed by the REMAINING high club honour (king or queen) to smother West's original doubleton jack and take FIVE club tricks, losing only to East's ace.

Once West won his club jack, he could have and should have BEATEN me in 3NT. All he had to do was to play a second LOW heart, retaining communication with his partner East. I could win dummy's heart king, but with East still holding the club ace, I would not have enough tricks.

Instead, West cashed his heart ace and played a third heart, thereby severing his own side's communication. I could now knock out East's ace of clubs and then take all the remaining tricks.

https://www.bridgeba...S6%7Cmc%7C10%7C

South deals and opens 1NT. All pass.

West is on lead with K87, 974, A74, Q1093. Let's face it: ANY lead might turn out well or poorly depending on the random layout of this random hand in the very OFTEN random game of bridge. West knows nothing other than the fact that South presumably has a flattish 15-17 HCP.

Leads CAN involve guesswork and luck, so we shouldn't be overly critical of them.

Having said that, however, why would West lead a diamond (his THREE-card minor) rather than a club (his FOUR-card minor)? Yes, as already stated, ANY lead might or might not work out, but isn't a club the NORMAL lead?

Let's just note that on THIS random layout on THIS random hand, the NON-normal diamond lead worked out poorly for the GIBBO robot sitting West.

https://www.bridgeba...H8%7Cpc%7CHJ%7C

benellis58, on 2026-January-12, 08:04, said:

I recommend a groundbreaking book, Winning Notrump Leads (as well as Winning Suit Contract Leads) by Bird and Anthias who used double dummy analysis on 5000 deals to come up with some opening lead suggestions from various holdings, against various NT contracts based on some simplified bidding.

I don't know how the simulations work out for this hand, but some of the various (and sometimes commonsense) findings they discovered, at least using double dummy simulations, is that leading from a 3 card suit is more likely to hit a 5 card suit opposite compared to leading from a 4 card suit.

And there's a major suit bias in that declarer's side may have used a transfer bid with a 5 card major, which they wouldn't have done with a 5 card minor. So I'm a little surprised that double dummy a spade wasn't led. Of course, this is GIB so why not a heart lead with no help for partner in that suit?

Thanks, Johnu. As always, your comments are welcome and appreciated.

I have already been aware of the Bird-Anthias book for some time now, but I have not read it. I have heard comments, both positive and negative, from respected bridge players. I can't comment on the book (since I haven't read it) but I agree with everything that you wrote.

An example of something that I have mentioned in the past: The incorrect, inaccurate, and quite possibly dishonest GIB definition of South's 2C, which says "New suit - 3+ clubs; 5+ hearts; 11+ HCP; 12-18 total points".

No, no, NO, GIB!

First, WHY do you persist in including useless, unnecessary, annoying, insulting nonsense like "New suit" in your definitions? There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to do so.

Second, and much more importantly, in the GIB/GIBBO system, 2C in auctions such as this most definitely does NOT promise "3+ clubs"! It PROMISES only 2+ clubs! If South is 4-5-2-2 without a strong hand, he cannot bid 2S because he lacks the strength for a reverse, he cannot bid 2H because that would show at least a sixth heart, and he cannot bid 2NT because that would show somewhere around 18-19 HCP in the GIB/GIBBO system. Yet he MUST bid SOMETHING, because his partner's 1NT is forcing. His choices are therefore either 2C or 2D, and 2C is clearly correct, as it saves space and also allows 2D by opener to LEGITIMATELY show at least three diamonds with a 2D call over pard's 1NT.

It is LONG past the time for such OBVIOUS flaws in the GIB/GIBBO definitions to be corrected!

https://www.bridgeba...CC5%7Cmc%7C9%7C

KING of spades at trick one? Wouldn't the 10 be the normal expert play?

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

It is SO easy to bamboozle the GIBBO robots. Here the GIBBO robots sitting East-West BOTH pitch diamonds and BOTH keep hearts, allowing declarer to take an "impossible" TWELVE (!) tricks on the hand.

https://www.bridgeba...H8%7Cpc%7CH9%7C

All 13 tricks for declarer when the GIBBO robot sitting East foolishly pitches his diamond guard to keep spades even though his partner West is MARKED for the spade jack. VERY bad defending!

https://www.bridgeba...S4%7Cpc%7CSA%7C

Typically stupid 5D bid by the GIBBO robot sitting North. They OFTEN perpetrate this nonsense at high levels when they lose their minds and decide to "rescue" their partner. Here the robot's "rescue" resulted in NS going one down in 5H instead of MAKING 4H. The score was still good, 75.81 %, but would have been a shared top of around 95 % had North made the EASY, NORMAL, and totally OBVIOUS pass of 4H. The purpose of this post, however, as always, is not to cry about the relatively insignificant loss on only this ONE of twelve boards comprising the game, but to EXPOSE this pathetic habit that the GIB and GIBBO robots have of stupidly attempting to play hero by foolishly pulling to a different suit out of PANIC. This crime against common sense occurs far too often with the GIB and GIBBO robots.

Furthermore, on this particular hand, the GIBBO robot's ludicrous 5D call doesn't even come CLOSE to matching his own GIB definition of "strong rebiddable diamonds; 7-8 total points".

"Strong rebiddable diamonds"??? He has J108542! "7-8 total points"??? He has a mere TWO (!) HCP, both in JACKS, and he has a flattish shape of 2-2-6-3. Where the HELL are the "7-8 total points"???

Why is he pulling the contract from a (high-scoring) major to a (low-scoring) minor? Why is he pulling from the FOUR level (where TEN tricks will be required for success) to the FIVE level (where ELEVEN tricks will be required for success)?

And, as foolish as all this ALREADY is, why is he doing this when he has J10 of HEARTS, which on this auction rates to be EXCELLENT support?

The answer to all the questions above is that he's committing these atrocities because he is a hopelessly bad bidder incapable of logical thought. Hands such as this are why I continue to say that I have never EVER seen even a single human player who is as bad in all facets of bridge as the GIB or GIBBO robots. (And BTW, West's defence was also hopeless, which is why South went down "only" one.)

https://www.bridgeba...C2%7Cmc%7C10%7C

benellis58, on 2026-January-13, 07:53, said:

I'm no smerriman, but this is a result of double dummy analysis. If East plays the ♠10, and declarer has the jack, the jack will will the first spade trick, and the declarer will drop the ♠K double dummy on the next play. If East plays the ♠K at trick one, at least the defense will win an early spade trick.
If declarer doesn't have ♠J, then the ♠K will still be dropped on the next round of spades double dummy. So clearly better to play ♠K at trick one assuming declarer is playing double dummy.
Of course, declarer is not playing double dummy, and that's a major weakness of GIB.

Quite correct, Johnu: In the REAL world, declarer doesn't always play double dummy (unless he's cheating!), which is why your final sentence ("Of course, declarer is not playing double dummy, and that's a major weakness of GIB.") is entirely accurate and well worth noting for those hoping to one day make GIBBO competent at bridge.

This hand (with a link at the bottom of this post) exhibits problems with GIB/GIBBO system, definitions, and bidding.

Looking only at the NS hands, you would want to play in spades. Depending on the random layout of this random hand, and/or depending on how you chose to play the club suit on some of those layouts, you would normally expect to make 9 or 10 tricks most of the time. Thus, depending on your mood, style, etc., and looking only at the NS hands, you would probably want to be...and EXPECT to be...in either 4S or 3S most of the time.

But that's not what usually happened when this board was played on BBO. The board was played 73 times. 29 times NS played 4S...BUT...41 times NS played in CLUBS at either the five or six level. On 3 occasions East-West played 4H.

Clearly, the NS pairs who played in spades did best...BUT they did so only because the human Souths were WISE enough to IGNORE the hopeless GIB definitions and make a bid that according to GIB showed "18-21 HCP" when they ACTUALLY had only thirteen HCP...a full FIVE fewer than the MINIMUM they were supposed to have, according to GIB. As I said, they were WISE to do so...and that is a statement about how BAD GIB's definitions are. The auctions in question were:

North: pass East: pass South: 1C West: 1H
North: double East: 4H South: 4S (defined as "3+ clubs; 4+ spades; 18-21 HCP; 19-22 total points".

At MY table, and presumably at the other 40 tables where NS played either five or six clubs, I (foolishly!) "respected" the (BAD) GIB definition and passed with my "mere" 13 HCP being a full five less than the MINIMUM of 18 promised by the GIB definition. My intention was to bid 4S over my partner's hoped-for (and EXPECTED, since this was a "best hand" game) double, thus getting to our presumably normal spade contract anyway but without risking my robot partner taking us to the stratosphere had I grossly overstated my strength according to the GIB definition of a direct 4S. And if partner PASSED OUT 4H, that would be fine anyway, because he would presumably have limited values, 4S would probably have no play, and maybe we would beat 4H.

After I made my disciplined (but unsuccessful) pass, West also passed, and my robot partner... bid...five clubs. I was NOT happy, as I was QUITE certain that spades, not clubs, was where we should be, but there was NOTHING I could do! Why not? Because I checked the definition of 5S if I now chose to bid it, and it stated that 5S by me would be a "cue bid" for clubs. I passed pard's 5C despite "knowing" that we were in the wrong black suit. I was WISE to do so because some human Souths TRIED to escape. They bid 5S...and sure enough, North then bid SIX clubs!

So: First, I think the GIB definition of South requiring "18-21 HCP" to bid 4S on this CONTESTED auction is too high. Yes, it should show more than a bare minimum, and it should show a REASON to compete over the enemy 4H, but it should offer South a little leg room, rather than insisting on at least EIGHTEEN HCP. Second, it's not clear that 5S should be a cue bid rather than a correction, although I admit that there could be some debate about that and I could see an argument for either interpretation.

The problem with the BIDDING (as distinct from the definitions) is North's 5C call. I think he should have doubled, which would be a FAR more flexible choice, allowing his partner South to bid 4S (which is certainly what I and probably all the other human Souths would have done here). If South lacked a decent spade fit, he could STILL bid 5C , so NS would STILL usually reach 5C anyway if that was "right". And with certain hands South could even pass the double, which might be optimum for NS. North's double would NOT be misinterpreted as showing a trump stack, because EW were both known from the auction to have heart length. In 5C, I and 15 other human Souths, went down "only" one in 5C, thereby at least salvaging an almost average 47.22 % on the board, as 25 other human Souths went down two or more and one NS pair allowed EW to make 4H.

https://www.bridgeba...D2%7Cpc%7CCT%7C

I have written before about how stupendously wretched the GIB/GIBBO system is for its 2C opening bids. Here is a hand that showcases just one of the many ways in which the system is amazingly, astoundingly ridiculous.

After the reasonable (given the system) first four NS calls (pass - 2C - 2D - 3D), North bids an UNIMAGINABLY stupid 3NT (!!!), LUDICROUSLY defined as "Cheaper minor - 4- total points".

To begin with, guess what: 3NT (!) is NOT the "cheaper minor" because, guess what again: NO TRUMP is NOT A MINOR!

But the utterly amazing stupidity goes beyond that, because why in HELL would any REAL bridge player want to be the first to bid no trump (!) with the hand North held: J, 1098642, 109, 10982.

Obviously, it is insane to want to declare no trump from THAT side of the partnership, and it is VERY likely that the hand will be wrongsided.

But it goes beyond THAT particular bit of utter lunacy, because an additional factor (quite obvious to ANY REAL bridge player) is that North has SIX hearts that he HAS not shown but COULD have EASILY shown by bidding 3H rather than his insane 3NT.

Now, on the actual random hand where this laughable travesty occurred, NS escaped the madness unscathed, because 3NT was the normal spot on the hand (and would have been reached on any NORMAL auction anyway) and had 9 obvious tricks. But that does not diminish the total ignorance of the GIBBO robot sitting North...OR the abysmal hopelessness of the GIBBO 2C system and the abject scorn that people should have for the incredibly bad definition of North's 3NT.

https://www.bridgeba...CS3%7Cmc%7C9%7C

Remarkably stupid lead by the GIBBO robot sitting East. With FIVE decent trumps (spades) on a hand where declarer North is known to hold only four, East foolishly and dangerously leads his heart king from K4 doubleton. Making his lead even MORE senseless (if that is even possible!) is the fact that dummy South is known to hold at least four hearts.

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

More HUMOUR from the witless 2C system and definitions of the GIB robots. This post will be about the differing auctions of the same board at two different tables. At both tables, EW are silent, so NS have an uninterrupted auction. North at both tables is a GIBBO robot. South at both tables is a human.

North has: AK932, Q83, 65, 1062. South has: Q7, A5, AKQJ1094, AJ.

At the first table: North passes. South opens 2C. North bids 2S, defined as "Positive - 5+ spades; 11- HCP; KQ of spades; 8-12 total points; forcing". South bids 2NT, defined as "No support; 2-4 clubs; 2-4 diamonds; 2-4 hearts; 1-2 spades; 22+ HCP; 23+ total points".

North now bids...6NT, defined as "5+ spades; 11 HCP; KQ of spades; 12- total points".

At the second table: The first three calls (pass, 2C, 2S) are the same, but here the human South now opts to bid 3NT (rather than 2NT). The definition for his 3NT is "5- hearts; 5- spades; 19+ HCP; 23+ total points; partial stop in clubs; partial stop in diamonds; partial stop in hearts".

North HERE now bids 4NT (as opposed to 6NT at the first table). His 4NT is defined as "Quantitative invite to 6NT; 5+ spades; 11 HCP; KQ of spades; 12 total points".

Now let's look at some of the definitions from the two tables:

The definition of 2NT at the first table is bad for several reasons. Would South really be RUSHING to bid no trump if he had only ONE spade? AND...why would he have at MOST four clubs or four diamonds, and for that matter, he might even have more than four hearts (although that is admittedly less likely)?

Now compare that to the definition of THREE no trump at the second table. South's TWO no trump rebid showed "22+ HCP", which, since NO upper limit is specified, is theoretically 22-37. Yet, bizarrely, South's THREE no trump rebid at the second table shows "only" 19+ HCP (which again, since no upper limit is specified, is theoretically 19-37). But WHY is it that the LOWER rebid of TWO no trump promises a minimum of 22 HCP, while the HIGHER rebid of THREE no trump could be done with "only" 19 HCP?

Note that North's bids at BOTH tables, whether 6NT at the first or 4NT at the second, are defined as promising "11 HCP" whereas he obviously has only 9, thereby, in both cases, not even adhering to his own GIB definition (as is FREQUENTLY the case with these robots).

At the second table, South accepted the invitation, so both tables reached 6NT. 13 tricks were there for the taking on the random layout, although the board was played in 6NT at seven tables and only five humans took all 13 tricks. One took only 12, and one actually maanged to go DOWN a trick.

But the point of all this is that due to the silly GIB 2C system and definitions, slam bidding is often nothing more than a guessing game. I purposely blamed GIB and NOT GIBBO in the preceding sentence, because the hideous system IS attributable to GIB, and there is at least HOPE that GIBBO will be improved at some point, just as Lorserker has already improved some of the more odious and reprehensible failures of GIB (such as leads, and the former nonsensical plays such as second hand high and third hand low). GIBBO is still far from good, but at least it's already a bit better than the horror that was GIB.