[msheald]

Hello! This bidding sequence has happened several times in the past with the robots.

https://tinyurl.brid...se.com/2u7am9b4

The description states "4+ Hearts (it had better be 5+ since it did not use a negative double), 7+ HCP, 8+ total points, forcing to 3NT"

Today, I went to 3 NT, only to discover that it went down big time since robot did not have a stopper in diamonds. In the past, I've left in the double as penalty since I'm trying to figure out what robot's bid means means. Again, down big time.

Does it mean support for my bid? If so, why not bid it since it forces me to bid the suit (clubs in today's deal) at the 4 level anyway. Does robot want me to bid something else?

What am I missing? Thanks.

Mike

[jillybean]

I don't play with GIBBO but if I follow the alerts, your 3♣ bid shows 17-20 total points,
the X shows "4+ !h, 7+ HCP, 8+ total points, forcing to 3NT" but does not promise a ♦ stopper.

Looks like you both mildy overbid. You are forced to bid, I'd like to say I would bid 4♣ but I may bid 3♥, 3nt is ill advised.

[pescetom]

 jillybean, on 2026-June-14, 09:00, said:

I don't play with GIBBO but if I follow the alerts, your 3♣ bid shows 17-20 total points,
the X shows "4+ !h, 7+ HCP, 8+ total points, forcing to 3NT" but does not promise a ♦ stopper.

Looks like you both mildy overbid. You are forced to bid, I'd like to say I would bid 4♣ but I may bid 3♥, 3nt is ill advised.

I do play with GIBBO and my understanding is that 1♥ really is 4+ cards (not 5+), which is a perfectly reasonable agreement. What is less reasonable is the strength required for the 3♣ rebid and the robot's consistent overbidding in this situation (I've seen it hang partner with less than this).
FWIW I would have chosen 3♥, both with a robot and a human. We are in a force, partner now knows we have Hx in hearts and no stopper in diamonds and can decide how to proceed (not sure what 3♠ would be, or whether 4♣ would be forcing, but luckily robot's explanation is AI for some reason).

[jillybean]

pescetom, on 2026-June-14, 09:57, said:

I do play with GIBBO and my understanding is that 1♥ really is 4+ cards (not 5+), which is a perfectly reasonable agreement. What is less reasonable is the strength required for the 3♣ rebid and the robot's consistent overbidding in this situation (I've seen it hang partner with less than this).
FWIW I would have chosen 3♥, both with a robot and a human. We are in a force, partner now knows we have Hx in hearts and no stopper in diamonds and can decide how to proceed (hopefully not 3♠. And is 4♣ forcing?).

Of course 1♥ is 4 , I hope. I don’t like the requirements for 3♣ either but that’s GIB

[msheald]

Thanks! I appreciate the feedback.

Perhaps a 2S bid? I don't play 3C as a jump bid in this situation, but it appears that robot does. Perhaps 2S to keep the level down?

Mike

[jillybean]

It's a tough hand , I don't know how GIBBO understands 2♠. I like it, it shows your shape and keeps it at the 2level

You could have opened 1nt and been done with it (yes, it's illegal here)

[mploum]

pescetom, on 2026-June-14, 09:57, said:

I do play with GIBBO and my understanding is that 1♥ really is 4+ cards (not 5+), which is a perfectly reasonable agreement. What is less reasonable is the strength required for the 3♣ rebid and the robot's consistent overbidding in this situation (I've seen it hang partner with less than this).
FWIW I would have chosen 3♥, both with a robot and a human. We are in a force, partner now knows we have Hx in hearts and no stopper in diamonds and can decide how to proceed (not sure what 3♠ would be, or whether 4♣ would be forcing, but luckily robot's explanation is AI for some reason).

This is the best advice. 3♠ would probably show a hand without ♥ tolerance, i.e shortage, and no ♦ stopper. 4126 shape most likely.
Note that responder cannot have a ♦ stopper, for the simple reason that it did not bid 3nt in the first place.

[pescetom]

 jillybean, on 2026-June-14, 11:47, said:

You could have opened 1nt and been done with it (yes, it's illegal here)

It's an illegal to agree that this hand may open 1NT even here (not for the small singleton but for having ten cards in two suits).
If you claim it was a first time deviation you might get away with it all the same.