[calm01]

The robot bidding makes an extraordinary turn by passing a bid described in its own desriptions as forcing.

Playing with 3 robots, the bidding was:

1Club 2Spade 3Spade all pass.

A robot partner opened a Club with

9542
K10 2
AQ2
A83

Following the 2spade jump over-call, I responded with a bid of 3spades holding:

K
AJ984
K9
KQJ54

Checking its meaning before making the bid (subsequently confirmed by using the hovering of the mouse over the 3spades bid), I was somewhat surprised to find a forcing bid passed.

Should the bidding be consistent with the word "forcing" in the descriptions ir the word "forcing" be removed from the descriptions?


Regards, Ric (calm01)

[arigreen]

Thanks for the report. The problem isn't so much with the word "forcing" as with the fact that GIB passed a forcing cuebid. (What I mean by this is that I wouldn't consider it a satisfactory solution if all I did was update the description to remove "forcing".)

The underlying problem was that 3S did not promise club support, so GIB didn't know that it could fall back by rebidding 4C. When I updated the definition of 3S to promise 4-card club support, the problem went away. Now GIB chooses among 3N and 4C, picking 3N more often than not.

This fix will be included with the next release of GIB.

[calm01]

Thanks for your prompt response.

How about a response to the problem under the heading "bidding failure?"