Two sets of 16 boards from the Bermuda Bowl/Venice Cup/Senior Bowl round robin were used in the computer-bridge round robin.  It is interesting to compare expert results with robot results.  Due to security the boards could not be played simultaneously with the human events.  That being the case, there is always the possibility of prior knowledge.  For that reason only two sets (rounds 3 and 9) were used and they were picked randomly.  Round 3 turned out to be quite dull, so some boards from round 9 are presented.

Board 1. Dealer North. None Vulnerable.
	♠ K 6 5 4 3 ♥ J 9 ♦ K 4 2 ♣ A J 10
♠ 10 7 ♥ A Q 8 6 3 2 ♦ 3 ♣ 7 4 3 2		♠ 9 2 ♥ 10 4 ♦ A J 8 7 6 ♣ K 9 6 5
	♠ A Q J 8 ♥ K 7 5 ♦ Q 10 9 5 ♣ Q 8

Board 1 is a routine board.  It's used to show that, on flat boards, the robots reach normal contracts and make the normal number of tricks.  In the major championships, 4♠ was reached 63 out of 66 times and 3NT was reached the other three times.  4♠ was made five times, four times with a club lead away from the King, and once on very poor defense after the ♥10 lead.  3NT was defeated each time.  The robots reached 4♠ all eight times, with all defeated one or two tricks.  No defender led away from the ♣K.

Board 2 is much more interesting.  The robots reached the cold 6♠, or sacrificed in 7♥ 50% of the time, compared to less than 25% of the time for the humans.

Board 2. Dealer East. N-S Vulnerable.
	♠ K Q J 8 7 6 3 ♥ 10 7 ♦ 6 ♣ K 10 2
♠ - ♥ J 8 6 5 2 ♦ A K J 8 2 ♣ Q 4 3		♠ 9 4 ♥ K Q 9 3 ♦ 4 ♣ J 9 8 7 6 5
	♠ A 10 5 2 ♥ A 4 ♦ Q 10 9 7 5 3 ♣ A

When West overcalled 1♥, either North and/or E-W preempted the auction and N-S had to be less than scientific, as is often the case with preempts.  In the Brazil-Italy match Villas Boas for Brazil gambled that there would not be two diamond losers, while Bocchi-Duboin for Italy didn't venture past 4♠.

WBridge5 had an excellent auction when RoboBridge passed over 1♦.

In the Jack-Micro Bridge match, both North robots judged that it was a good bet that South had first or second round control of hearts.  When Jack responded 5♦ to KCB, West doubled for the lead, and then doubled the final contract.  Jack gained 6 IMPs.

Board 5. Dealer North. N-S Vulnerable.
	♠ J 5 3 2 ♥ Q 8 5 3 ♦ 9 6 5 ♣ 6 2
♠ A Q 9 7 ♥ 6 2 ♦ K J ♣ K J 10 9 7		♠ 10 ♥ A 10 4 ♦ A 10 8 4 3 2 ♣ A 4 3
	♠ K 8 6 4 ♥ K J 9 7 ♦ Q 7 ♣ Q 8 5

WBridge5 had a good result on Board 5 when it reached 6♣.  This is not a good bet on a heart lead, but RoboBridge led the ♣6 and WBridge5 had an easy time making 13 tricks.  In the human championships, most led a heart against 6♣, but the good lie of the cards led to all 6♣ contracts making.  In the Venice Cup, South Africa led the ♣6 against USA1's 6♣ contract.

Comparing human and robot results on Board 5, the humans were more aggressive, bidding slam 21 out of 66 times against 1 out of 8 for the robots.  You be the judge as to which group who would win the bidding contest.  A non-vulnerable slam is less than an even proposition.  3NT looks like the best game contract.

Board 8. Dealer West. None Vulnerable.
	♠ K Q 8 5 4 2 ♥ 7 5 ♦ Q 10 6 ♣ 3 2
♠ A J 7 3 ♥ 10 ♦ A K 7 3 ♣ A K 7 5		♠ 6 ♥ A K Q 8 ♦ J 8 4 ♣ Q J 10 8 4
	♠ 10 9 ♥ J 9 6 4 3 2 ♦ 9 5 2 ♣ 9 6

Board 8 offered grand slam possibilities.  The robots bid 7♣ once.  Once again the humans were more aggressive in bidding slam, and this time more accurate.  The grand slam in clubs is a decent bet, cold on a two-two trump break, and a good bet on a three-one break. 6♣ is cold on almost any lie of the cards.  Even 6NT makes, as we shall see.  The robots bid slam 50% of the time compared to 62% for the humans.  There were accidents.  In the Bermuda Bowl, Ireland went down in 7♣ against China SMEG.  The play was not recorded.  In the Senior Bowl USA1 lost 15 IMPs to China Hong Kong as they defended 1♠x for +300 while China Hong Kong was in 7♣ for +1440.

An example of good play occurred when Bridge Baron was in the inferior contract of 6NT.

Bridge Baron’s 3NT bid seems strange, but 3♣ isn’t forcing and 3♠ won’t get them to 3NT when it’s right.  East’s should bid 3♣ at its first turn, but Double was chosen by 1/4 of the human field.  Bridge Baron won the opening lead of the ♠K.  If Bridge Baron ducks, then a heart return breaks up a possible spade-heart squeeze, leaving only a diamond heart squeeze against South, a reasonable possibility.  Winning the first spade preserves endplays against either opponent, and in particular, if there was a diamond-heart squeeze against South by ducking the spade lead, then declarer can still endplay South in hearts to lead away from the ♦Q (it does lose, compared to playing for a diamond-heart squeeze by ducking the opening lead, when North started with exactly doubleton ♦Q).

Bridge Baron cashed five clubs and three hearts, South discarded two hearts and a spade coming down to three diamonds and a spade, and North discarded four spades coming down to three diamonds and a spade.

	♠ Q ♥ - ♦ (Q?) x x ♣ -
♠ J ♥ -  ♦ A K 7 ♣ -		♠ - ♥ 8 ♦ J 8 4 ♣ -
	♠ - ♥ J ♦ (Q?) x x ♣ -

If South has the ♦Q then declarer must lead a heart and discard the spade Jack, endplaying South.  If North has the ♦Q, then declarer must lead a diamond to the Ace and ♠J, endplaying North.  South correctly discarded a spade, leaving declarer with a guess.  Bridge Baron chose correctly and picked up 13 IMPs when Shark Bridge played in 3NT making 5.