[TimG]

♠ A72
♥ 62
♦ J85
♣ KT962

After P-(1♠)-DBL-(2♠), GIB doubled (described as "Responsive, 3+ C; 3+ D; 4+ H; 11- HCP). The auction continued:

DBL-(P)-3♥-(P)
4♣ - (P)- 4♥-(4♠)
P - (P) - 5♣-(P)
5♥!

Not that I'm especially proud of my actions, but GIB's 4♣ was described as "5+C; 3+D; 4+H" so "correcting" 4♣ to 4♥ seemed reasonable at the time.

I'm guessing that at some point GIB decided I had a big single-suited hand with hearts. But, I'd suggest that the description for a responsive double should not include "4+H" and/or once GIB follows the responsive double with a new suit the descriptions should change so that "4+H" is no longer there.

Tim

PS #1011, bd 5

[barmar]

Why is it even making a responsive double when it's 5-3 in the minors? Shouldn't it just bid the 5-card suit?

You sometimes have to take the suit lengths in the bid descriptions with a grain of salt. I'm pretty sure I've seen some that add up to more than 13 cards. I guess it likes to play hands in r.g.b postings.