[pescetom]

It seemed recently that for some reason the priority of GiB work was to enable claims rather than fix bugs, even at the expense of disabling an addition to GiB that the original developer retained essential.
So why does a rented Advanced 2/1 GiB not manage to claim here , if not at trick 10 at least at trick 11?

[smerriman]

pescetom, on 2025-October-15, 15:01, said:

It seemed recently that for some reason the priority of GiB work was to enable claims rather than fix bugs, even at the expense of disabling an addition to GiB that the original developer retained essential.

This seems very misguided.. The claim algorithm was specifically introduced to fix bugs.. e.g. the well known one where GIB has a 100% line of success, but goes down by taking a losing finesse it thought was guaranteed for other reasons. Having an independent algorithm that can look at a layout and determine if it can guarantee a certain number of tricks without having to resort to flawed Monte Carlo simulations seems a good starting point to fix this.

I don't know how that algorithm works, or why it doesn't catch your case (and that's definitely worth asking), and still plan to test the impact of GIBson myself, but if Lorand says the current implementation resolves enough bugs that it outperforms the version with GIBson, I believe him, even if it's somewhat surprising that it was so ineffective and results in some cases where it goes wrong now that it didn't use to..

[pescetom]

I can see a conservative algorithm failing to claim at trick 10 (when it is possible to voluntarily lose a trick, although even a Taliban TD would allow a claim of "all mine" here), but not once we have all the remaining trumps.

[lorserker]

proactive claiming is not enabled at every kind of table, because users at casual tables for example didn't like that the robot was claiming.

as a rule of thumb, if you play with three robots at the table, then the robot will claim.
if there are other humans, then we selectively enable it in some tournaments, but mostly it's disabled.

what i refer to above that proactive claiming is disabled, means that the UI doesn't show that the robot wants to claim.
even if the robot doesn't visibly claim, it will play a proven card if it can.

[pescetom]

 lorserker, on 2025-October-18, 04:36, said:

proactive claiming is not enabled at every kind of table, because users at casual tables for example didn't like that the robot was claiming.

as a rule of thumb, if you play with three robots at the table, then the robot will claim.
if there are other humans, then we selectively enable it in some tournaments, but mostly it's disabled.

what i refer to above that proactive claiming is disabled, means that the UI doesn't show that the robot wants to claim.
even if the robot doesn't visibly claim, it will play a proven card if it can.

Thanks. This was in a mainly human-human pairs tournament. But I don't think anyone would have resented a claim by the robot: quite the contrary, it would help dispel the prejudices of some players against robots (as would delaying their calls a bit).

[smerriman]

lorserker, on 2025-October-18, 04:36, said:

proactive claiming is not enabled at every kind of table, because users at casual tables for example didn't like that the robot was claiming.

Was this reverted from May?

diana_eva, on 2025-May-07, 09:10, said:

• Robots will now claim in all games when the rest of the play is obvious (expanded from claims only in daylongs and challenges)

I guess it must have been in place for a while, given that you said they "didn't like it", though somewhat surprising, since you can always simply click reject if you didn't like it..

[lorserker]

yes, we had to revert after just a few days, because people at casual tables were complaining that the robot is claiming and should leave them alone to play as they like.

interestingly people never complained at instant tournaments, daylongs and similar. there they liked it.