THE 6TH ANNUAL WORLD COMPUTER-BRIDGE CHAMPIONSHIP

Montreal, Canada

August 23-27, 2002

Alvin Levy

Introduction

The American Contract Bridge League’s (ACBL) 6th annual World Computer-Bridge Championship was held in Montreal, PQ, August 23-27, 2002, as part of the World Bridge Federation’s (WBF) World Bridge Championships. Starting in 1997 the ACBL has held an annual World Computer-Bridge Championship in conjunction with a major bridge activity. This is the third time it has been held at a WBF championship, the other years being at an ACBL championship.

 

These annual championships, as well as other informal competitions, have themselves been a major factor in the rate of improvement in computer-bridge programs. This event has also led to an informal interactive group of software developers, with their numbers increasing. As the level of play improves, bridge journalists and the public are becoming increasingly interested in the quest for computers to play at the “expert” level. Will computer-bridge duplicate the achievement of computer-chess, with the 1997 triumph of IBM’s “Deep Blue” over Garry Kasparov? Only time will tell.

 

The Contestants

Seven contestants, representing six countries, entered their bridge-playing computer programs to compete for the title of World Computer-Bridge Champion. Eleven computer-bridge programs have entered in one or more years of this championship and there are five more program developers who have expressed an interest in competing in the near future.

 

Play Format

Computers (1.8 MHz with Windows XP) were supplied. Automatic play was used with a “table” consisting of four computers (North-East-South-West) connected to a central server, or Table Manager. A “team” of four identical programs played as NS at one table and as EW at another table. At the start of a match the opponents input each other’s Convention Card. After each deal the central server distributed the next hand and play continued. Humans only interacted with the play when an explainable bid was made, which was very infrequent. When an explainable bid was made the opponent manually input the meaning using a preset protocol. The TM kept a record of all play and scored the matches.

 

The speed of play was set at four minutes a deal, approximately one-half that of human play.  Systems and conventions were limited to the equivalent to the ACBL’s General Chart.

 

The Competition

After five days of computer-bridge competition, including a complete 20-board round robin, a 48-board semifinal and a 64-board final, the defending champion Jack nipped WBridge5 by 1 IMP. The two finalists had played a total of 232 boards sitting both East/West and North/South...464 hands of bridge in all. It came down to the last board. With one board to go Jack led WBridge5 by 5 IMPs. Hans Kuijf, developer of Jack, and Yves Costel, developer of WBridge5, along with their supporters, spectators and organizers watched intently as the play unfolded.

 

Text Box: Board 64 North Dlr: West ♠ A Q 9 4 Vul: E-W ♥ K Q 3 2 ♦ 10 ♣ K 6 4 2 West East ♠ K 6 2 ♠ 10 5 ♥ 8 7 6 4 ♥ A 10 9 ♦ A 9 6 ♦ J 8 5 4 ♣ 10 8 7 ♣ A Q J 9 South ♠ J 8 7 3 ♥ J 5 ♦ K Q 7 3 2 ♣ 5 3

 

West

North

East

South

Jack

WBridge5

Jack

WBridge5

Pass

1♣

Pass

1♦

Pass

1♥

Pass

1♠

Pass

2♠

All Pass

 

 

Opening lead: ♣7

WBridge5 North did well to bid only 2♠. At the “other” table Jack went down one in 4♠ when North took a more aggressive view. In the unlikely event that WBridge5 made 10 tricks it would become the new champion, if it made nine tricks, a playoff would be necessary, and if it made eight tricks, or less, Jack would retain the title.

 

West led the ♣7. There are four obvious losers, 2 clubs, one heart and one diamond. If declarer could time the play correctly 9 tricks were possible without a trump return. However, when Jack returned the ♠10 at trick two declarer could not make more than eight tricks without risking the contract. In the actual play, WBridge5 played on hearts first and diamonds second. Each defender, after winning their Ace, returned a trump and declarer was held to 8 tricks...and Jack was crowned the 2002 World Computer-Bridge Champion.

 

Jack versus WBridge5 in the 64-board final:

Final

1-16

17-32

33-48

49-64

Total

Jack

21

9

42

25

97

WBridge5

46

10

23

17

96

 

Round Robin

Leading up to the semifinals and finals, the 20-board round robin ended with Jack, WBridge5, MicroBridge and Q-Plus Bridge taking the top four spots. GIB would have qualified for the semifinals but chose to withdraw from the tournament during the last round robin match because of technical difficulties.

 

Jack won the round robin convincingly by 13 VPs. Its only loss was to WBridge5 by 15 IMPs. WBridge5’s performance was impressive as it went through the round robin without a loss. GIB (before the technical problem) and MicroBridge had also scored well in the round robin.

 

20-Board Round Robin, 25-VP Scale (IMPs/VPs)

Team

Jack

WB5

Micro B

Q-Plus

BCB

MB

GIB

Total

 

Jack

The Netherlands

Bye

15

28-43

12

69-42

21

81-17

25

58-33

20

78-41

25

45-41

16

134

1

Wbridge5 v. 2.3

France

43-28

18

Bye

15

75-60

18

61-58

16

51-32

19

64-40

20

46-45

15

121

2

Micro Bridge

Japan

42-69

9

60-75

12

Bye

15

40-31

17

46-18

21

96-13

25

46-41

16

115

3

Q-Plus Bridge

Germany

17-81

3

58-61

14

31-40

13

Bye

15

77-14

25

115-30

25

21-75

4

99

4

Blue Chip Bridge

UK

33-58

10

32-51

11

18-46

9

14-77

3

Bye

15

75-19

25

22-83

3

76

5

Meadowlark Bridge

USA

16-78

3

40-64

10

13-96

0

30-115

0

19-75

4

Bye

15

avg+

17

49

6

GIB

USA

41-45

14

45-46

15

41-46

14

75-21

25

83-22

25

W/D

0

Bye

15

108

W/D

 

Text Box: Board 16 North Dlr: West ♠ K 5 Vul: E-W ♥ 7 ♦ A J 10 7 ♣ K Q 107 4 3 West East ♠ A 7 6 ♠ 9 8 3 2 ♥ K Q 8 6 3 2 ♥ A 10 5 4 ♦ Q 5 4 ♦ K 9 3 ♣ 5 ♣ A J South ♠ Q J 10 4 ♥ J 9 ♦ 8 6 2 ♣ 9 8 6 3 An interesting hand from the round robin saw Micro Bridge make a nice play against Blue Chip Bridge.

 

 

 

West

North

East

South

1♥

2♣

3♣

Pass

3♥

Pass

4♥

All Pass

 

Opening lead: ♣K

 

At both tables E-W reached 4♥ with the same bidding sequence and received the ♣K lead. When Micro Bridge declared the hand declarer pulled two rounds of trump, ruffed a club, cashed the ♠A, and led a spade. North had not unblocked the ♠K and had to give declarer a ruff and sluff. 4♥ making 4 +620. At the other table Blue Chip Bridge did not find the winning play and 4♥ went down one, -100, and 12 IMPs to Micro Bridge.

 

 

 

Jack and WBridge5 won their 48-board semifinal matches convincingly to set up the exciting final.

 

Semifinal Results

 

Carryover

1-16

17-32

33-48

Total

Jack vs. Q-Plus Bridge

 

 

 

 

 

Jack

Q-Plus Bridge

+22

68

25

52

3

34

58

176

96

 

WBridge5 vs. Micro Bridge

 

 

 

 

 

WBridge5

Micro Bridge

+6

94

8

39

30

76

8

215

46

 

Text Box: Board 2 North Dlr: East ♠ J 9 7 Vul: N-S ♥ J 8 4 ♦ K Q J 9 2 ♣ 5 3 West East ♠ K Q 8 4 ♠ 2 ♥ 9 ♥ 5 2 ♦ 7 6 4 ♦ A 8 5 3 ♣ A Q 9 7 4 ♣ K J 108 6 2 South ♠ A 10 6 5 3 ♥ A K Q 10 7 6 3 ♦ 10 ♣ -

 

 

 

 

Good judgment and some luck led to a big pickup for WBridge5 against Micro Bridge in their semifinal match.

 

West

North

East

South

Micro Bridge

WBridge5

Micro Bridge

WBridge5

 

 

3♣

4♥

5♣

5♥

Pass

Pass

6♣

Dbl

Pass

6♥

Pass

Pass

Dbl

All Pass

 

Opening lead: ♠K

 

West’s 6♣ bid was an excellent save but South made a good risk/reward decision in bidding 6♥. West made the best lead, the ♠K, but it turns out that with East having a singleton spade and the ♦A, 6♥ was cold, + 1430 NS. A big pickup for WBridge5 as Micro Bridge was down in 5♠ at the other table.

 

 

 

 

Text Box: Board 9 North Dlr: North ♠ K 9 Vul: E-W ♥ 4 2 ♦ K 10 9 8 4 ♣ 8 6 3 2 West East ♠ A J 10 7 2 ♠ 5 ♥ A 9 3 ♥ K 8 7 6 5 ♦ 3 ♦ Q J 6 5 2 ♣ A Q 7 5 ♣ K 9 South ♠ Q 8 6 4 3 ♥ Q J 10 ♦ A 7 ♣ J 10 4 Two well-played hands from the Finals between Jack and WBridge5 follow:

 

 

 

West

North

East

South

Jack

WBridge5

Jack

WBridge5

 

Pass

Pass

Pass

1♠

Pass

1NT

Pass