[1eyedjack]

---

MP, Instant.

After North's X, the description for 3D is identical to that of 4D.

As it happened I got out rather lucky, although I intended 4D to be forcing. Given the values attached to the bid, clearly it is not. But I lived in hope that the there was a description/meaning mismatch.

I do feel that 4D should show a stronger hand than 3D, even if it is non-forcing (and North is weak enough to pass any non-forcing raise by South. Do we agree with the double?)

[steve2005]

I wouldn't want North Gib to make a negative double with that hand opposite an opening never mind an overcall. It just doesn't have the values 8 tp isn't enough to force to the 3-level. It's ♦ are crap if you don't have awesome ♦ and awesome hand it's a disaster. And again it's counting it's ♠ shortness.

Look what happens if Gib passes, you'll balance with a double and now it can bid it's nice ♣ suit 3♣ which will be a much safer spot if your ♦ aren't so good.

[iandayre]

Once again, not a programming issue, a poor description. Of course 4D must be stronger than 3D, although it should be non-forcing.

Personally I am OK with N making the responsive double with that hand. It's aggressive but the shape makes the hand worth competition, and if partner rebids Spades that's not awful.