[calm01]

Both non-vulnerable, the bidding was:

N E S W
1C x xx 1S
P 3S 4C P
P x P P
P

The double of 4C by a Robot was described as:
"Takeout doUble 2- C; 3-5D; 3-5 H; 4- S; biddable S; 18+ total points;"

West, also a Robot, passed this takeout double" and the contract was made.

When you have a suit bid (although forced) and had it raised, a double of a competitive bid by opponents by either partner is for penalties as you have the choice of passing, bidding on in your agreed suit or bidding another suit or notrump. The description makes no bridge sense as being for takeout.

So which Robot is wrong, the one with the strange description or the one that ignored the description?

Currently playing against 3 Robots is a bit like Riuber Bridge against three palookas.

While winning is nice as you have only one palooka partner but two palooka opponents, would it be nice to have a better challenge perhaps?

[manudude03]

I don't think this is really a bug, I'd probably pass the double with xxxx KJx xxx xxx seeing that 4S is likely just turning a small plus into a minus

[TylerE]

Since when is 1♠ a "forced bid" on this auction?

[manudude03]

People have various meanings to pass, there are plenty of topics on BBF about what pass means in this auction (get on the case gwnn ).

Edit: here's 1 for starters: http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...l=redouble+pass

[Bbradley62]

We can't possibly comment on West's action without being told West's hand... We have all knowingly passed takeout doubles, and occassionally it doesn't work so well...