[myprac]

---

GIB did this at two tables. I guess East's balancing double is okay as a two-suited takeout, and I can see the problem it poses for West, but it can't be right to pass here, can it?

[cloa513]

myprac, on 2012-January-06, 22:31, said:

---

GIB did this at two tables. I guess East's balancing double is okay as a two-suited takeout, and I can see the problem it poses for West, but it can't be right to pass here, can it?

What both humans bid badly choosing and choose a measley 2♠- its easily 3♠(hopefully not game forcing) . West's bid is a natural 2♣ or 2♦.

[barmar]

The poor human bidding is not relevant.

GIB currently thinks it needs at least 3 cards in a suit not bid by the opponents to respond to the double. We should fix this.

How does this sound: Bid the longest 5+ suit in which the opponents have shown at most 4 cards. If you don't have one of these, bid the longest unbid suit, preferring a major.

Should we make an exception for an 8-card suit, and bid it even if the opponent has shown 5?

[Bbradley62]

barmar, on 2012-January-09, 13:40, said:

How does this sound: Bid the longest 5+ suit in which the opponents have shown at most 4 cards. If you don't have one of these, bid the longest unbid suit, preferring a major.

I think GIB should prioritize showing 4 of the unbid major over showing 5 of any suit the opponents have bid.

[barmar]

Bbradley62, on 2012-January-11, 13:13, said:

I think GIB should prioritize showing 4 of the unbid major over showing 5 of any suit the opponents have bid.

It already does that (in fact, it will bid a 3 card unbid suit if necessary). I'm trying to figure out what it should do when that's not possible.