[Bbradley62]

Some Robot tournaments are "random hands", where hands are "dealt" randomly, and some are "best hand" where only hands in which the human player has the most (or tied for most) HCP are played. In "best hand" tournaments, is the fact that we are playing that format supposed to be treated as AI or UI?

---

I would always open this South hand (in first, second or third seat) playing "random hands", but I passed it in a "best hands" tournament, thinking that having the hand passed out would be an above average result for me. Am I supposed to be taking such things into account?

[barmar]

It's part of the conditions of contest, I think those are AI.

But since there are no TDs or adjustments in these tournaments, what difference does it make? You can do whatever you want in these tourneys. Everyone else has the same information, they can (and should) take it into account just as well, so no one gets an advantage based on UI.

Are you hoping to resurrect the "Best hand tourneys aren't real bridge" discussions based on this issue?

[Leo LaSota]

I really do not understand the point that you are trying to make in bringing this hand up for discussion. Is the fact that ace spades is poorly placed for your side the reason that you know that passing is the correct choice? It certainly could go against you to pass on different layouts of the other 3 hands. Besides, it appears that there are auctions where you open and likely end with a plus score.

[Bbradley62]

barmar, on 2012-June-16, 21:39, said:

Are you hoping to resurrect the "Best hand tourneys aren't real bridge" discussions based on this issue?

No, I just wanted to know how others treat this. If I were trying to make such a point, I would be direct about it.

[Bbradley62]

Leo LaSota, on 2012-June-16, 21:50, said:

I really do not understand the point that you are trying to make in bringing this hand up for discussion. Is the fact that ace spades is poorly placed for your side the reason that you know that passing is the correct choice? It certainly could go against you to pass on different layouts of the other 3 hands. Besides, it appears that there are auctions where you open and likely end with a plus score.

I certainly don't "know" that passing is the right choice. (I very carefully said "thinking that..." since it certainly doesn't seem clear.) Maybe this wasn't the best hand to illustrate my point, but it happened to be the one that came up and made me want to ask the question about how other people handle the "I know I have the best hand" information. Do you pass/open at all differently in best hand games than you do in random hand games?

[barmar]

I only take "best hand" into account when playing total points games. In duplicates, I tend to bid normally. Sometimes I try varying my style in 4th seat, and it almost always goes wrong.

[gordontd]

Bbradley62, on 2012-June-16, 23:38, said:

Maybe this wasn't the best hand to illustrate my point,

Maybe a clearer one is when you have an 11-count and your partner opens in front of you. Now you know it's likely to be a part-score hand. Certainly you aren't going to make borderline invitations in such circumstances.

[JLOGIC]

Yes I always bid differently because it's best hand. A simple one is 1C p 1H AP as an auction when partner is an unpassed hand. Or preempting with a pretty good hand when you know you don't have a game. Or opening a hand you wouldn't usually since you think it's going to get passed out. There are a million ways where this comes into play.

It seems like everyone who is playing the event having AI about this makes much more sense than an unenforceable (and undocumented) rule that the information that everyone in the entire event has available to them is UI and should not be used.

[blackshoe]

How often do robot opponents call the TD and assert that the lone human at the table has used UI?

[RMB1]

How often do honest players try to play by the rules even when they know opponents will not have the laws enforced?

[ArtK78]

JLOGIC, on 2012-June-18, 17:05, said:

Yes I always bid differently because it's best hand. A simple one is 1C p 1H AP as an auction when partner is an unpassed hand. Or preempting with a pretty good hand when you know you don't have a game. Or opening a hand you wouldn't usually since you think it's going to get passed out. There are a million ways where this comes into play.

It seems like everyone who is playing the event having AI about this makes much more sense than an unenforceable (and undocumented) rule that the information that everyone in the entire event has available to them is UI and should not be used.

Exactly. The fact that the human player has the best hand is part of the conditions of contest, and the human player is entitled to use that information as he sees fit.

[blackshoe]

RMB1, on 2012-June-19, 08:03, said:

How often do honest players try to play by the rules even when they know opponents will not have the laws enforced?

You assume that a "robot, best hand to the human" game is bridge. It isn't.

I agree with Justin and Art. That the human will have the best hand is in the CoC, so it cannot sensibly be UI.

[Phil]

I never thought the conditions of contest would be considered by some to be UI.

[barmar]

I think it's because it's so rare for the CoC to result in inferences about the hands. However, it's not unprecedented: for many years people have been hosting "goulash" tourneys. However, it's rare to award masterpoints for them.

[blackshoe]

It's technically not legal to issue masterpoints for goulash tournaments, at least in the ACBL, because such tournaments (including club games) are required to follow the laws, and under the laws, "goulash" dealing is illegal (Law 6B).

[wank]

the game you're playing is not bridge so unsurprisingly trying to apply the bridge lawbook to your game results in ridiculous rules.

[jeffford76]

blackshoe, on 2012-June-19, 23:00, said:

It's technically not legal to issue masterpoints for goulash tournaments, at least in the ACBL, because such tournaments (including club games) are required to follow the laws, and under the laws, "goulash" dealing is illegal (Law 6B).

Actually the ACBL Board of Directors voted on a proposal in Philadelphia to only award masterpoints to games that follow the laws (with an exception for teaching games), and it failed.

This was part of a failed attempt to shut down the robot games.

[blackshoe]

Interesting. I guess getting people their masterpoints is more important than anything else.

Please, ACBL, credit me with the points I need. No, I haven't earned them, but apparently that doesn't matter.

[Vampyr]

While it's difficult to see how rewarding a learning/practising tool benefits the League, could one dare to hope that they wish to use the extra revenue to promote bridge in North America?

[barmar]

I think calling best-hand bridge "not bridge" is a serious exaggeration. Rubber and duplicate bridge require significantly different strategies, but we don't say that one of them is "not bridge". I think best-hand robot bridge fits within the same continuum, it's just another variation.