[m1cha]

I got this one tonight with two big issues.

---

(1) Advancer doubles, then bids 3♥ promising a 6-card suit (which sounds good to me) but the robot only has a 4-card suit! So I end up having to play 4♥ in a 4-2-fit (4 down) instead of a 7-2 fit in diamonds.

(2) Why doesn't the hand diagram show me playing 4♥? Because after dummy came down, I wasn't fond of playing that hand immediately, and I left BBO. I came back 7 hours later and got the same hand back at an earlier stage of bidding, right after East's 1♠ bid. So I could avoid the trap and insist on my ♦s. Good for me, but I think this shouldn't happen!

(3) Finally I wonder why GIB doesn't let me play 4♦ peacefully (and make it). But since the bidding had been f*cked up earlier, this point is probably not worth discussing.

[iandayre]

GIB likes to make calls like 3H AS IF they meant a general game try. Even its own GIB partners rarely if never interpret them that way. Lots of luck for the human ones.

[m1cha]

Hm. Perhaps it IS a general game try and just the label is wrong. With 6+♥ and 12 points, would one bid 3♥ directly rather than double? If it's just the label, it could be solved easily.

Well but if it's a game try, 4♦ should say "no" and be to play. If I wanted to force to game, I could bid 3♠ instead of 3♥.

Isn't this double also somewhat strange? Kind of "Partner, you have 11+ points and I have 6+. We don't have a fit yet but it seems a good idea to me if you bid something on the 3 level". If the double showed 10+ points and if the 3♦ response had a narrower range, it wouldn't be necessary to enter the auction again with 12 points on a high level in the obvious absence of a fit.

[iandayre]

m1cha, on 2017-January-09, 21:36, said:

Hm. Perhaps it IS a general game try and just the label is wrong. With 6+♥ and 12 points, would one bid 3♥ directly rather than double? If it's just the label, it could be solved easily.

Well but if it's a game try, 4♦ should say "no" and be to play. If I wanted to force to game, I could bid 3♠ instead of 3♥.

Isn't this double also somewhat strange? Kind of "Partner, you have 11+ points and I have 6+. We don't have a fit yet but it seems a good idea to me if you bid something on the 3 level". If the double showed 10+ points and if the 3♦ response had a narrower range, it wouldn't be necessary to enter the auction again with 12 points on a high level in the obvious absence of a fit.

Agreed GIB should pass 4D. The double, though, seems like a perfectly normal responsive double to me.

[m1cha]

iandayre, on 2017-January-10, 15:24, said:

Agreed GIB should pass 4D. The double, though, seems like a perfectly normal responsive double to me.

In terms of distribution, definitely. In terms of strength, 6+ total points over 2♠, are you sure?
I mean, I can live with that but, for comparison, a negative double over 2♠ I'd rather rate at 9 or 10 points ...

[iandayre]

m1cha, on 2017-January-10, 16:29, said:

In terms of distribution, definitely. In terms of strength, 6+ total points over 2♠, are you sure?
I mean, I can live with that but, for comparison, a negative double over 2♠ I'd rather rate at 9 or 10 points ...

I wasn't referring to the description. I said the actual, 11 HCP hand is a solid responsive double.