A very abstract question or thought today. Are there computer programs out there which could run simulations against different possible combinations of cards (which are consistent with the defensive bidding and initial play) which could assess the objectively best lines of declarer play on hands like this one? Chess is rather further advanced here with programs such as Stockfish which uses massive amounts of computing power, and the complication with bridge is that psychological factors and deception apply which is not the case at the chess board. I’d be interested if you know of anything here or anyone else does. Deep Finesse states what can be done double dummy of course.
Regards,
Iain
bobbywolffApril 17th, 2024 at 1:37 pm
Hi Iain,
No doubt chess programs are better suited to objective analysis than bridge, mainly because of what you tell us about psychological factors, deception and the rare inability of being certain where the non-played card or cards are still lurking.
Sadly, I am not that familiar of what is about to appear on the scene of immediate bridge learning, although I rather doubt of its existence now or anytime soon. Chances are that this type of analysis at bridge would be more generally figured out, basically at the expert level, without the need for checking it out.
Finally, bridge is more suited to percentages as to what was originally dealt (unnecessary at chess) but often supremely helpful to the bridge affectation, originating in the player’s mind.
And when you mention “Deep Finesse”, my gut seems to rebut the knowledge gained, mainly because my opponent is aware of what he holds, but niggardly refused to allow me to guess right, when that, much too often, occurred.
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related
Hi Bobby,
A very abstract question or thought today. Are there computer programs out there which could run simulations against different possible combinations of cards (which are consistent with the defensive bidding and initial play) which could assess the objectively best lines of declarer play on hands like this one? Chess is rather further advanced here with programs such as Stockfish which uses massive amounts of computing power, and the complication with bridge is that psychological factors and deception apply which is not the case at the chess board. I’d be interested if you know of anything here or anyone else does. Deep Finesse states what can be done double dummy of course.
Regards,
Iain
Hi Iain,
No doubt chess programs are better suited to objective analysis than bridge, mainly because of what you tell us about psychological factors, deception and the rare inability of being certain where the non-played card or cards are still lurking.
Sadly, I am not that familiar of what is about to appear on the scene of immediate bridge learning, although I rather doubt of its existence now or anytime soon. Chances are that this type of analysis at bridge would be more generally figured out, basically at the expert level, without the need for checking it out.
Finally, bridge is more suited to percentages as to what was originally dealt (unnecessary at chess) but often supremely helpful to the bridge affectation, originating in the player’s mind.
And when you mention “Deep Finesse”, my gut seems to rebut the knowledge gained, mainly because my opponent is aware of what he holds, but niggardly refused to allow me to guess right, when that, much too often, occurred.
of too many failed guesses by me.