[slar]

In a daily tournament, I was 3rd hand and the bidding went 3♠(4♣)4♠(X);p(p). I had a decent hand and thought we would make it so I decided to redouble. GIB inexplicably pulled the redouble to 5♣. The explanation is that the bid shows a first round control (it happened to be a void). This is a terrible bid. There is only one scenario where playing a redoubled contract is worse than bidding on - 7♠ vs. 4♠XX nonvulnerable. As if +1480 vs. +1510 makes much difference in any form of scoring! Of course the hand only makes 4♠ so this was about an 18 IMP swing. Ouch.

GIB should never pull a redouble that shows values.

[slar]

I've looked at all of the pinned posts and can't work out how to create a simple diagram so here is the link to the hand as played.

{comments}

---

[iandayre]

Obviously not something the most novice human would ever do. Part of the problem is defining the XX by point count. Of course it means I think we will make! But it is still hard to imagine why GIB does anything but pass.

[lycier]

iandayre, on 2016-October-28, 11:18, said:

Obviously not something the most novice human would ever do. Part of the problem is defining the XX by point count. Of course it means I think we will make! But it is still hard to imagine why GIB does anything but pass.

Good reply.
I think all the main problems are defining the xx by TPs count. This meant it was xx TP count explanation caused the disaster.
Now I would take this issue to enlarge its ranges.
Hand-1 Here is Slar's hand.

---

Hand-2 Here is a normal Gibs sequences.

---

Hand-3 Here is my hand to enlarge this issue.

---

Obviously, if without worse x/xx TP count explanations, there are not such rediculous stories.

[lycier]

Of course, this may be a weak area for Gib.